VI  V 


r; 


HISTORICAL  LECTURES 

ON    THE  ' 


LIFE  OF  OUR  LORD  JESUS  CHRIST, 


BEING     THE 


iuis^ait  Jfwiuns  for  %  ^m  1859. 


NOTES,  CRITICAL,  HISTORICAL,  AND  EXPLANATORY. 


C.  J.  ELLICOTT,  B.D., 

PROFESSOR  OF  DIVINITY,  KINO'S  COLLEGE,  LONDON;    LATE  FELLOW  OF  ST.  JOHN'S 

COLLEGE,  CAMBRIDGE;    AUTHOR  OF  CRITICAL  AND   GRAMMATICAL 

COMMENTARIES   ON   ST.  PALL'S  EPISTLES. 


BOSTON: 

GOULD     AND     LINCOLN, 

59     WASHINGTON     STREET. 

NEW   YORKi    SHELDON   AND    COMPANY. 
CINCINNATI!  GEORGE   S.   BLANCUARD. 

1862. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1861,  by 

GOULD    AND    LINCOLN, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


Vf.  F.  Dkaper,  Printer  and  Electrotyper, 
Andover,  Mass. 


HUspntfuIIiT  JhtsmbtLr 

THE   REV.  WILLIAM   HENRY   BATESON,  D.D. 

MASTER    OF    ST.   JOHN'S    COLLEGE;    VICE-CHANCELLOR  J 

THE   REV.  WILLIAM   WHEWELL,  D.  D. 

MASTER    OF    TRINITY    COLLEGE; 

THE   REV.  WILLIAM   HEPWORTH   THOMPSON,  M.  A. 

REGIUS  PROFESSOR  OF  GREEK; 

TRUSTEES  OF  MR.   HULSE'S  BENEFACTIONS 
AT  CHRISTMAS,  1858. 


/  ■%- 


PREFACE. 


The  following  work  consists  of  eight  Lectures,  of  which 
the  first  six  were  preached  before  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge in  the  year  1859.  The  two  remaining  Lectures  are 
added  as  giving  a  necessary  completeness  to  the  subject,  and 
as  in  substantial  accordance  with  the  will  of  the  munificent 
Founder. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  make  any  preliminary  remarks 
upon  the  text  of  the  Lectures,  as  nearly  all  that  seems  re- 
quired in  the  way  of  introduction  to  the  subject  will  be  found 
in  the  opening  Lecture.  It  may,  however,  be  desirable  to 
remind  the  reader  that  he  has  before  him  no  attempt  at  a 
complete  Life  of  our  Lord,  but  only  Lectures  upon  it.  These 
it  has  been  my  object  to  make  as  complete  as  I  have  been 
able  in  everything  that  relates  to  the  connection  of  the  events, 
or  that  in  any  way  illustrates  their  probable  order  and  succes- 
sion. The  separate  incidents,  however,  have  not  in  every 
case  been  dwelt  upon  at  equal  length  ;  some  being  related  by 
a  single  Evangelist,  and  requiring  no  explanatory  comments, 
while  others,  from  being  related  by  two  or  more,  and  some- 
times appearing  to  involve  discordant  statements,  have  called 
for  somewhat  lengthened  considerations.  Those  portions  in 
which,  for  every  reason,  it  has  seemed  desirable  that  some 


X  PREFACE. 

regular  continuity  of  narrative  should  be  carefully  preserved, 
viz.,  the  Last  Passover,  and  the  Forty  Days,  were  not 
required  to  be  delivered  from  the  pulpit,  and  have  thus  ap- 
proached more  nearly  to  regular  history.  I  have,  however, 
in  both  been  most  careful  to  preserve  the  same  tone  and  char- 
acter which  marked  the  rest,  and  I  have  been  thankful  that 
the  circumstances  under  which  the  others  were  written  and 
delivered  have  prescribed  for  me  in  these  last  two  Lectures, 
almost  as  a  matter  of  course,  that  gravity  and  solemnity  of 
tone  which  is  so  especially  called  for  in  the  recital  of  events 
so  blessed  and  so  holy,  yet  withal  so  awful  and  so  stupendous. 
To  adopt  the  usual  tone  of  mere  historical  writing  when  such 
subjects  are  before  us,  seems  to  me  little  short  of  profanity ; 
and  I  have  been  taught,  by  the  repulsiveness  of  some  nar- 
ratives of  the  closing  scenes  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  written 
in  the  conventional  style  of  ordinary  history,  to  be  more  than 
usually  thankful  that  the  nature  of  my  present  undertaking 
has  at  any  rate  prevented  me  from  sharing  in  an  error  so  great 
and  so  grievous. 

A  few  remarks  must  be  made  on  the  notes.  In  these  it  has 
been  my  effort  to  combine  two  things  which  are  not  always 
found  in  union  —  a  popular  mode  of  treating  the  question 
under  consideration,  and  accuracy  both  in  o'utline  and  detail. 
How  far  I  may  have  succeeded,  it  is  for  others  to  judge.  All 
I  will  venture  to  ask  the  reader  kindly  to  bear  in  mind  is  this  : 
that  much  time  and  very  great  care  and  thought  have  been 
expended  on  these  notes  (more,  perhaps,  than  might  have  been 
needful  if  they  had  been  longer  or  their  language  more  tech- 
nical), and  that  thus  they  are  not  always  to  be  judged  of  by 
their  brevity  or  the  familiar  list  of  authorities  to  which  they 
refer.     In  my  references  I  have  aimed  solely  at  being  useful, 


PREFACE.  XI 

not  to  the  special,  but  to  the  general  student,  and  thus  have 
but  rarely  permitted  myself  to  direct  attention  to  any  works 
or  treatises  that  are  not  perfectly  well  known  and  accessible. 
I  have  not,  by  any  means,  attempted  to  exclude  Greek  from 
my  notes,  as  this  seems  to  me,  in  such  works  as  the  present, 
to  savor  somewhat  of  an  affectation  of  simplicity ;  but  I  bave 
still,  in  very  many  cases,  either  translated  or  quoted  from  the 
translations  of  others  the  longer  passages  from  the  great  Greek 
commentators  which  form  so  considerable  and  so  valuable  a 
portion  of  these  notes.  A  similar  course  has  been  pursued 
in  reference  to  German  expositors,  though  longer  quotations 
from  them  are  only  occasional.  These  latter  writers  are,  as 
it  will  be  observed,  often  referred  to ;  but  care  has  been  taken 
only  to  give  prominence  to  the  better  class  of  them,  and  fur- 
ther to  refer,  where  translations  exist,  to  the  work  in  its  Eng- 
lish rather  than  its  German  form.  In  a  word,  my  humble 
aim  throughout  these  notes  has  been  to  engage  the  interest  of 
the  general  reader,  and  I  pray  God  that  herein  I  may  have 
succeeded ;  for  much  that  is  here  discussed  has  of  late  years 
often  been  put  forward  in  popular  forms  that  neither  are,  nor 
perhaps  were  intended  to  be,  conformable  to  the  teaching  of 
the  Church.  Of  my  own  views  it  is  perhaps  not  necessary 
for  me  to  speak.  This  only  will  I  say,  that,  though  I  neither 
feel,  nor  affect  to  feel,  the  slightest  sympathy  with  the  so-called 
popular  theology  of  the  present  day,  I  still  trust  that,  in  the 
many  places  in  winch  it  has  been  almost  necessarily  called 
forth  in  the  present  pages,  I  have  used  no  expression  towards 
sceptical  writings  stronger  than  may  have  been  positively 
required  by  allegiance  to  catholic  truth.  Towards  the  honest 
and  serious  thinker  who  may  feel  doubts  or  difficulties  in  some 
of  the  questions  connected  with  our  Lord's  life,  aM  tenderness 


Xll  PREFACE. 

may  justly  be  shown ;  but  to  those  who  enter  upon  this  holy 
ground  with  the  sinister  intentions  of  the  destructive  critic,  or 
of  the  so-called  unprejudiced  historian,  it  is  not  necessary 
or  desirable  to  suppress  all  indication  of  our  repulsion. 

Marginal  references  have  been  added,  as  indicating  the 
authority  for  the  expressions  and  statements  of  the  text. 
When  these  are  not  present,  and  guarded  conjecture  has  been 
resorted  to,  particular  care  has  been  taken  to  make  this  most 
distinctly  apparent. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  detain  the  reader  with  further  com- 
ments ;  and  it  only  remains  for  me,  with  all  lowliness  and 
reverence,  to  lay  before  Almighty  God  this  attempt,  this  poor 
and  feeble  attempt,  to  set  forth  the  outward  connection  of 
those  incidents  that  inspired  pens  have  been  moved  to  record 
of  the  life  of  His  Eternal  Son.  May  He  pardon  its  many 
failings  and  defects ;  may  He  look  with  pity  on  efforts,  many 
of  which  have  been  made  while  the  shadow  of  His  hand  has 
rested  darkly  over  him  who  strove  to  make  them ;  and  may 
He  bless  this  partial  first-fruits  of  a  mercifully  spared  life,  by 
permitting  it  to  minister,  in  its  humble  measure  and  degree,  to 
His  honor  and  glory,  and  to  the  truth  as  it  is  in  His  blessed 
Son. 

TPIA2,  MONA2,  "EAEHSON. 

Cambridge,  October,  1860. 


CONTENTS. 


LECTURE    I. 

luirobuciorg  Considerations  on  i\t  (ftfjaratteristies 
of  tht  Jour  Gospels. 

Statement  of  the  subject,  19.  —  Reasons  for  choosing  it,  19. —Method  adopted 
in  the  Lectures,  24  sq.  —  Caution  in  applying  the  principles  laid  down,  25. — 
Sources  of  the  history,  26.  —  Details  mainly  in  reference  to  internal  charac- 
teristics, 28  sq.  — Necessity  of  recognizing  the  individualities  of  the  four  Gos- 
pels, 31.  — Errors  of  earlier  harmonists,  32  sq.  —  Individuality  of  St.  Mat- 
thew's Gospel,  35.  — St.  Matthew's  portraiture  of  our  Lord,  36.  —  Individuality 
of  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  37.  —St.  Mark's  portraiture  of  our  Lord,  39.  — Individ- 
uality of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  41.  — St.  Luke's  portraiture  of  our  Lord,  42.— 
Individuality  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  44  sq.  —  St.  John's  portraiture  of  our 
Lord,  45.  —  Conclusion,  47. 


LECTURE    II. 

f&tyz  $irifj  ano  |nfaiug  of  our  |Toro. 

General  aspects  of  the  present  undertaking,  49.  — Arrangement  of  the  subject, 
51.  —  The  Miraculous  Conception  of  our  Lord;  its  mystery  and  sublimity,  52 
"Q— The  narrative  of  the  conception  considered  generally,  54.  —The  nam- 


14  CONTENTS. 

tive  of  the  conception  considered  in  its  details,  56  sq.  —  Self-evident  truth  of 
the  narrative,  68.  — Journey  of  the  Virgin  to  Elizabeth,  60  sq.  — Internal 
truthfulness  of  the  two  inspired  Canticles,  63.  —  Return  of  the  "Virgin  and 
the  revelation  to  Joseph,  64.  — Journey  to  Bethlehem,  and  taxing  under 
Quirinus,  66  sq.  —The  Nativity  and  its  attendant  circumstances,  69  sq.  —  The 
Presentation  in  the  temple,  73  sq.— The  visit  and  adoration  of  the  Magi, 77. 
— The  guiding  star,  78  sq.  —  The  extreme  naturalness  of  the  sacred  narrative, 
80. —  Flight  into  Egypt  and  murder  of  the  Innocents,  83. —The  silence  of 
Josephus,  83.— The  return  to  Judaea,  85  sq.  —Conclusion,  87. 


LECTURE    III. 

%\z  (Sarlg  $nin*Hn  phtisirg. 

The  early  years  of  our  Lord's  life,  89.  — Eeserve  of  the  Evangelists,  89. —The 
brief  notice  of  our  Lord's  childhood,  90.  — Equally  brief  notice  of  our  Lord's 
youth,  91. —Visit  to  the  temple  when  twelve  years  old,  93. —  Search  for  and 
discovery  of  the  Holy  Child,  94  sq.  — Frivolous  nature  of  the  objections  urged 
against  the  narrative,  98.  — Silence  of  the  Evangelists  on  the  next  eighteen 
years  of  our  Lord's  life,  99  sq.  — The  mental  and  spiritual  development  of  our 
Lord,  102.  — The  ministry  of  the  Baptist  and  its  probable  effects,  104  sq.— 
Journey  of  our  Lord  to  the  Baptism  of  John,  106  sq.  — The  nature  of  St. 
John's  recognition  of  our  Lord,  108. — The  Temptation  of  our  Lord;  its  true 
nature  and  circumstances,  110. — The  temptation  no  vision  or  trance,  111. — 
The  temptation  an  assault  from  without,  112.  —  The  temptation  addressed  to 
the  three  parts  of  our  nature,  113.  — The  ministering  angels,  and  the  return  to 
Galilee,  115. — The  testimony  of  the  Baptist,  115.  —  The  journey  to  and  mir- 
acle at  Cana  in  Galilee,  117.  — Remarks  on  the  miracle,  117  sq.  —  Brief  stay 
at  Capernaum,  and  journey  to  Jerusalem,  121.  —  The  expulsion  of  the  traders 
from  the  temple,  122. — Impression  made  by  this  and  other  acts,  124. — The 
discourse  of  our  Lord  with  Nicodemus,  124.  —  Our  Lord  leaves  Jerusalem  and 
retires  to  the  northeast  parts  of  Judaea,  125. —  The  final  testimony  of  the 


CONTENTS.  15 

Baptist,  126  sq. —  Our  Lord's  journey  through  Samaria,  129  sq. — The  further 
journey  of  our  Lord  to  Galilee,  131.  —  Our  Lord's  return  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
feast  of  l'urim,  132  sq.  —  Main  objection  to  this  opinion,  135  sq.  —  The  miracle 
at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  136. —  Distinctive  character  of  this  epoch,  13S. — The 
termination  of  the  early  Judxan  ministry,  139.  —  Concluding  remarks  and 
exhortation,  141. 


LECTURE    IV. 

Cbc  Ptnistrji  in  6astrriT  (Salilec. 

Ilesumption  of  the  subject,  143.  —  Brief  recapitulation  of  the  events  of  the  Ju- 
daean  ministry,  143  sq.  —  Two  preliminary  observations,  14G. — The  exact 
period  of  time  embraced  in  the  present  Lecture,  146. — The  variations  of  order 
in  the  three  synoptical  Gospels,  147. — The  order  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke 
followed  in  tins  Lecture,  149  sq. — Appearance  of  our  Lord  in  the  synagogue 
:it  Nazareth,  152.  —  Departure  to  and  abode  at  Capernaum,  154.  —  Special 
call  of  the  four  disciples,  155.  —  Healing  of  a  demoniac  in  the  synagogue  at 
Capernaum,  156.  —  Continued  performance  of  miracles  on  the  same  day,  157. 

—  The  nature  of  our  Lord's  ministerial  labors  as  indicated  by  this  one  day, 
159.  —  Probable  duration  of  this  circuit,  161. — The  return  to  Capernaum,  and 
healing  of  the  faithful  paralytic,  162.  —The  call  of  St.  Matthew,  and  the  feast 
at  his  house,  164.  — Further  charges;  the  plucking  of  the  ears  of  corn,  165.  — 
The  healing  of  a  man  with  a  withered  hand  on  a  Sabbath,  167. — Choice  of 
the  twelve  Apostles,  and  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  169.  —  Frobable  form  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  170. — The  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant,  and 
raising  of  the  widow's  son,  171  sq.  —  The  Baptist's  message  of  inquiry,  173.  — 
Short  circuit;  fresh  charges  of  the  rharisccs,  174.  —  The  teaching  by  parables, 
176.  — The  passage  across  and  storm  on  the  lake,  177. — The  Gergesene  de- 
moniacs, 17S.  — The  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter,  179.  —The  second  visit  to  the 
synagogue  at  Nazareth,  181.  — The  sending  forth  the  twelve  Apostles,  182  sq. 

—  The  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  184.  —  Concluding  remarks,  185-G. 


16  CONTENTS. 

LECTURE    V. 

%\i  pinisirg  in  ^oriljcrn  ftnltitt. 

General  features  of  this  part  of  our  Lord's  bistory,  187.  —  Special  contrasts  and 
characteristics,  185.  —  Chronological  limits  of  the  present  portion,  188.  —  Pro- 
gressive nature  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  189.  —  Contrasts  between  this  and  pre- 
ceding portions  of  the  narrative,  190. — Teaching  and  preaching,  rather  than 
miracles,  characteristic  of  this  period,  191.  —  Such  a  difference  probable  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  193.  —  The  return  across  the  lake;  our  Lord  walks  on 
the  water,  193 sq.  —  Return  to  Capernaum;  our. Lord's  discourse  in  the  syna- 
gogue, 196  sq.  —  Healings  in  Gennesareth,  and  return  of  the  Jewish  emis- 
saries, 199  sq. — Journey  to  Tyre  and  Sidon,  and  the  miracle  performed  there, 
201.  —  Return  toward  Decapolis  and  the  eastern  shore  of  the  lake,  203.  — 
Journey  to  Decapolis ;  healing  of  a  deaf  and  dumb  man ,  204.  —  The  feeding  of 
the  four  thousand,  205.  — Not  identical  with  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand, 
206. — Return  to  the  western  side  of  the  lake,  207.  —  Journey  northward  to 
Csesarea  Philippi,  208. —The  locality  and  significance  of  the  Transfiguration, 
210.  — The  healing  of  a  demoniac  boy,  211.  —  Return  to  and  probable  tempo- 
rary seclusion  at  Capernaum,212  sq.  —  Conclusion  and  recapitulation,  215  sq. 


LECTURE    VI. 

%\}t  |o«nrtgings  iofoarb  $£rusalnn. 

General  character  of  the  present  portion  of  the  inspired  narrative,  218.  —  Limit* 
of  the  present  section,  219.  —  Harmonistic  and  chronological  difficulties,  219 
sq.  —  Precise  nature  of  these  difficulties,  221.  —  Comparison  of  this  portion  of 
St.  Luke's  Gospel  with  that  of  St.  John,  223  sq.  —  Results  of  the  above  consid- 
erations, 225.  —  Brief  stay  at  Capernaum;  worldly  requests  of  our  Lord's 
brethren,  226  sq.  —Journey  to  Jerusalem  through  Samaria,  228.  —  Our  Lord's 


CONTENTS.  17 

arrival  and  preaching  at  Jerusalem,  230.  —  The  woman  taken  in  adultery; 
probable  place  of  the  incident  in  the  Gospel  history,  232.  —  Further  teaching 
and  preaching  at  Jerusalem,  233  sq.  — Departure  from  Jerusalem,  and  mission 
of  the  Seventy,  235.  — Further  incidents  in  Judtea  recorded  by  St.  Luke,  236. 
— Our  Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the  Feast  of  Dedication,  237  sq.  —  The 
Lord's  message  to  Herod,  and  preparation  to  leave  Feraa,  240.  —  Frobable 
events  during  the  last  two  days  in  Pera:a,  242  sq.  —  Apparently  confirmatory 
notice  in  St.  John,  244.  —  Effect  produced  by  the  raising  of  Lazarus,  245. — 
Incidents  in  the  last  journey  to  Judaea,  247  sq.  —  Onward  progress  toward 
Jerusalem,  250.  — Arrival  at  Jericho,  251.  — Conclusion,  253. 


LECTURE    VII. 

Introductory  comments,  254.  —  Characteristics  of  the  preceding  portion  of  the 
narrative,  255.  —  Characteristics  of  the  present  portion,  256. — The  journey 
to  and  supper  at  Bethany,  257. —  The  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem,  259 
sq.  —  Reflections  on  the  credibility  of  the  narrative,  263.  —  Our  Lord's  entry 
into  Jerusalem,  265.  — The  cursing  of  the  barren  fig-tree  (Monday),  266  sq.  — 
The  cleansing  of  the  temple,  and  works  of  mercy  performed  there,  268.— 
Answers  to  the  deputation  from  the  Sanhedrin  (Tuesday),  270  sq.  —  Con- 
tinued efforts  on  the  part  of  the  deputation,  273. — The  question  about  the 
duty  of  paying  tribute  to  Ca:sar,  274  sq. —  Exposure  and  frustration  of  the 
stratagem,  277. —  The  question  of  the  Sadducees  touching  the  resurrection, 
278. — The  question  of  the  lawyer  about  the  greatest  commandment,  280. — 
The  question  relative  to  the  woman  taken  in  adultery,  281.  —  Our  Lord's 
question  respecting  the  Son  of  David,  283. — The  coffering  of  the  poor  widow, 
285.  —  The  request  of  the  Greek  proselytes,  286  sq.  —  The  departure  from  the 
temple,  and  the  last  prophecies,  288.  —  Consultation  of  the  Sanhedrin,  and 
treachery  of  Judas  (Wednesday),  290. — The  celebration  of  the  Last  Supper 
(Thursday),  291  sq.— The  agony  in  Gethsemane  (Thursday  night),  296  sq.— 
The  betrayal  of  our  Lord,  299. —  The  preliminary  examination  before  Annas, 

2* 


18  CONTENTS. 

300.  —The  examination  before  the  Sanhedrin,  302  sq.  — The  brutal  mockery  of 
the  attendants,  305. —The  fate  of  Judas  Iscariot,  306.  — Our  Lord's  first  ap- 
pearance before  Pilate,  307  sq.  —  The  dismissal  of  our  Lord  to  Herod,  310. — 
Second  appearance  before  Pilate ;  his  efforts  to  set  our  Lord  free,  311  sq.  — 
Scourging  of  our  Lord;  renewed  efforts  of  Pilate,  314  sq.  — The  Crucifix- 
ion, 317.  — Occurrences  from  the  third  to  the  sixth  hour,  319.  —  The  darkness 
from  the  sixth  to  the  ninth  hour,  320  sq.  —  The  portents  that  followed  our 
Lord's  death,  323.  —  The  removal  from  the  cross,  and  burial  of  the  Lord's 
body,  325  sq.  —  Conclusion,  328. 


LECTURE    VIII. 

%\t  iaxil  gags. 

Introductory  comments,  331.  —  Doctrinal  questions  involved  in  this  portion  of 
the  history,  331  sq.  —  Characteristics  of  the  present  portion  of  the  narrative ; 
number  of  the  accounts,  334. — Their  peculiarities  and  differences,  335  sq. — 
Resumption  of  the  narrative,  338.  — Visit  of  the  women  to  the  sepulchre,  339 
sq.  —  The  appearance  of  the  angels  to  the  women  at  the  sepulchre,  343.  — The 
two  Apostles  at  the  tomb,  344.  —  The  Lord's  appearance  to  Mary  Magdalene, 
346  sq.  —  Probable  effect  produced  on  the  Apostles  by  Mary's  tidings,  349.  — 
The  Lord's  appearance  to  the  other  ministering  women,  350  sq.  —  The  appear- 
ance of  our  Lord  to  the  two  disciples  journeying  to  Emmaus,  352  sq.  —  Ina- 
bility of  the  disciples  to  recognize  our  Lord,  355.  —  Appearance  to  the  ten 
Apostles,  357  sq.  —  Disbelief  of  Thomas;  our  Lord's  appearance  to  the  eleven 
Apostles,  361. — Appearance  by  the  lake  of  Tiberias,  362  sq. — Reverential 
awe  of  the  Apostles,  365.  —  Appearance  to  the  brethren  in  Galilee,  367.  —The 
Lord's  Ascension,  369  sq.  —  Conclusion,  371  sq. 


THE 


LIFE    OF    CHRIST 


LECTURE    I. 

INTRODUCTORY  CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THE  CHARACTER- 
ISTICS OF  THE  FOUR   GOSPELS. 

THESE   ARE   WRITTEN,    THAT  YE   MIGHT  BELIEVE  THAT  JESUS  IS  THE  CHRIST, 
THE  SON   OF   GOD;     AND   THAT  BELIEVING   YE   MIGHT    HAVE    LIFE  THROUGH 

his  name.  —  St.  John,  XX.  31. 

These  words,  brethren,  which,  in  the  context  from  which 
they  are  taken,  allude  more  particularly  to 
the  miracles  of  Christ,  but  which  I  venture  Jf™"' °f  s«»- 
here  to  extend  in  application  to  the  whole 
evangelical  history,  will  in  some  degree  prepare  you  for 
the  subject  that  I  purpose  laying  before  you  in  this  series 
of  Lectures.  After  serious  meditation  on  the  various  sub- 
jects which  the  will  of  the  munificent  founder  of  these 
Lectures  leaves  open  to  the  preacher,  it  has  appeared  to 
me  that  none  would  be  likely  to  prove  more  useful  and 
more  edifying  than  the  history  and  connection  of  the 
events  in  the  earthly  life  of  our  Lord  and  Master,  Jesus 
Christ. 

Two  grave  reasons  have  weighed  with  me  in  choosing 
this  momentous  subject;  one  more  exclusively 
relating  to  the  younger  portion  of  my  audi-     .w»"to- 
ence,  the  other  relating  to  us  all. 

The  first  reason  has  been  suggested  by  the  feeling,  which 
I  believe  is  not  wholly  mistaken,  that  these 

First  reason. 

Lectures  are  too  often  liable,  from  the  nature 

of  the  subjects  to  which  they  are  restricted,  to  prove  un- 


20  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE        Lect.  I. 

attractive  to  the  younger  portion  of  those  among  us.  It 
is  but  seldom  that  the  young  feel  much  interested  in  the 
debated  questions  of  Christian  evidence.  Nay,  it  is  natural 
that  they  should  not.  With  the  freshness  and  warmth  of 
springing  life,  with  the  generous  impulses  of  yet  unchilled 
hearts,  they  are  ready  for  the  most  part  to  believe  rather 
than  to  doubt,  to  accept  rather  than  to  question.  The  calm 
and  impartial  investigation,  the  poised  judgment,  the  sus- 
pended assent,  which  must  all  characterize  the  sober  dis- 
putant on  Christian  evidences,  and  which  we  of  a  maturer 
age  may  admire  and  appreciate,  are,  I  truly  believe,  often 
so  repulsive  to  our  younger  brethren,  that  after  having  sat 
out  a  sermon  or  two,  they  company  with  us  no  more.  This 
applies  with  still  greater  force,  as  has  been  thoughtfully 
suggested  to  me,  to  the  new  comers  in  the  October  term, 
whose  first  entrance  into  the  Church  of  this  our  mother 
University  is  commonly  during  the  second  part  of  the 
course  of  the  Hulsean  Lecturer.  They  have  thus  all  the 
disadvantage  of  coming  among  us  in  the  middle  of  a 
course ;  and  when  to  that  is  added  a  consciousness  of  de- 
fective sympathy  with  the  theme  of  the  preacher,  they  are 
tempted,  I  fear,  thus  early  to  withdraw  from  what  they 
deem  unedifying,  and  so  to  lay  the  foundation  of  the  evil 
habit  of  neglecting  attendance  at  this  Church,  and  of  treat- 
ing lightly  the  great  Christian  duty  of  assembling  ourselves 
together  in  the  house  of  God. 

It  has  thus  seemed  desirable  to  choose  a  subject  which, 
if  properly  treated,  ought  to  interest  and  to  edify  the  very 
youngest  hearer  among  us,  and  which  may  admit  of  such 
natural  divisions  as  may  cause  the  later  hearers  to  feel  less 
sensibly  the  disadvantage  of  not  having  attended  the  ear- 
lier portion  of  the  course. 

My  second  reason,  however,  for  the  selection  of  this  pe- 
culiar subject  is  one  that  applies  to  us  all, 

Second  reason.  ,  # 

and  is  stdl  more  grave  and  momentous.  It  is 
based  on  the  deep  conviction,  that  to  the  great  questions 
connected  with  the  life  of  our  Redeemer,  Jesus  Christ,  the 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF  THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  21 

Son  of  Adam,  the  Son  of  God,  all  the  controversies  of  these 
latter  days  are  tending  noticeably  to   con- 

J  °  J  Luke  Hi.  38. 

verge.  Here  it  is  that  even  the  more  abstract 
questions,  that  try  the  faith  of  our  own  times,  —  questions 
as  abstract  as  the  degree  of  inspiration  of  the  Written 
Word,1  or  the  nature  of  the  efficacies  of  the  Atonement2 
which  that  Word  declares  to  us,  —  must  seek  for  their  ulti- 
mate adjustment.  Here  is  the  battle-ground  of  the  pres- 
ent, here,  perchance,  the  mystic  Armageddon  of  coming 
strife.  Already  forms  of  heresy  more  subtle  than  ever  Ebi- 
onite  propounded  or  Marcionite  devised,  —  forms  of  heresy 
that  have  clad  themselves  in  the  trappings  of  modern  his- 

1  In  every  complete  discussion  on  the  Inspiration  of  tlie  Scriptures,  the  nature 
of  the  more  special  references  of  our  Lord  to  the  Old  Testament  must  be  fully 
and  fairly  considered.  To  take  an  extreme  case:  when  our  Lord  refers,  dis- 
tinctly and  explicitly  (Matt,  xii.39,  40),  to  "the  sign  of  the  prophet  Jonas."  have 
we  any  escape  from  one  of  two  alternatives,  either,  («)  that,  in  spite  of  all  that 
has  liccn  urged  to  the  contrary,  and  all  the  scarcely  disguised  contempt  with 
which  the  history  of  Jonah  has  been  treated  by  modern  criticism  (comp.  Hitzig, 
Kleinen  Propheten,p.  361  sq.  ),  the  narrative  is  notwithstanding  true  and  typical, 
and  referred  to  by  our  Lord  as  such;  or,  (6)  that  it  is  fabulous,  and  that  our 
Lord  wittingly  made  use  of  a  fabulous  narrative  to  illustrate  His  Resurrection? 
Modern  speculation  does  not  hesitate  to  accept  (b),  and  to  urge  that  it  was  not  a 
part  of  our  Lord's  mission  to  correct  all  the  wrong  opinions,  more  or  less  con- 
nected with  religion,  which  might  be  prevalent  in  the  minds  of  those  with 
whom  lie  was  conversing  (comp.  Norton,  Genuineness  of  Gospel,  Vol.  ii.  p.  477). 
If  we  rest  contented  with  such  unhappy  statements,  we  must  be  prepared  to 
remodel  not  only  our  views  of  our  Lord's  teaching,  but  of  some  of  the  highest 
attributes  of  His  most  holy  life:  consider  and  contrast  Ullmann,  Unsiindlichkeit 
Jesu,  §  19  (Transl.  p.  8,  75,  Clark).  The  assertion  that  "the  sign  of  Jonah"  was 
not  referred  by  our  Lord  to  His  resurrection,  but  to  His  whole  earthly  life,  seems 
distinctly  untenable  (see  esp.  Meyer  on  Matt.  xii.  40);  but  were  it  otherwise,  it 
could  scarcely  affect  the  above  considerations. 

To  contemplate  a  rejection  of  these  words  from  the  inspired  narrative  in  the 
face  of  tbe  most  unquestioned  external  evidence  (Maurice,  Kings  and  Prophets, 
p.  357)  cannot  be  characterized  as  otherwise  than  as  in  the  highest  degree  arbi- 
trary and  uncritical. 

2  Everything  which  tends  to  derogate  from  the  Divinity  of  our  Lord  tends,  as 
priestly  long  ago  clearly  perceived  [History  of  Corruptions, Vol. Lp.  153).  to  do 
away  with  the  idea  of  an  atonement,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  word,  for  the 
sins  of  other  men.  (Comp.  M agee,  Atonement ,  Dissert.  8.)  So,  conversely,  all 
limitations  of  the  atonement,  all  tendencies  to  represent  our  Lord's  sacrilice  as 
merely  an  act  of  moral  greatness  (comp.  Jowett,  Romans,  Vol.ii.p.  481),  will  be 
found  inevitably  to  lead  to  indirect  denials  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  the  union 
of  the  two  natures  in  our  Lord,  and  to  implied  limitations  of  His  Divinity. 
(Compare,  but  with  some  reserve,  Maodonell,  Lectures  on  the  Atonement,  Donel- 
lan  Lectures,  p.  61  sq.) 


22  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

torical  philosophy,1  and  have  learned  to  accommodate  them- 
selves to  the  more  distinctly  earthly  aspects  of  modern 
speculation,  have  appeared  in  other  Christian  lands,  and 
are  now  silently  producing  their  influence  on  thousands 
and  tens  of  thousands  who  bear  on  their  foreheads  the  bap- 
tismal cross  of  Christ.  Already,  even  in  our  own  more 
favored  country,  humanitarian  views  with  regard  to  the 
Person  of  our  Redeemer  are  thrusting  themselves  forward 
with  a  startling  and  repulsive  activity,  —  intruding  them- 
selves into  our  popular  literature  as  well  as  into  our  popu- 
lar theology,2  yea,  and  winning  assent  by  their  seductive 
appeal  to  those  purely  human  motions  and  feelings  within 
us,  which,  while  we  are  in  the  flesh,  we  can  harldly  deem 
separable  from  the  nature  of  even  sinless  man.  Already 
too  a  so-called  love  of  truth,  a  bleak,  barren,  loveless  love 
of  truth,  which  the  wise  Pascal3  long  since  denounced, —  a 
love  of  truth  that  like  Agag  claims  to  walk  delicately,  and 
to  be  respected  and  to  be  spared,  —  is  gathering  around  it- 
self its  Epicurean  audiences;  already  is  it  making  its  boast 
of  fabled  civilizations  that  rest  on  other  bases  than  on 
Christ  and  His  Church,4  daily  and  hourly  laboring  with 

1  For  a  clear  statement  of  the  two  problems  connected  with  the  Gospel  history 
(the  criticism  of  the  evangelical  writings,  and  the  criticism  of  the  evangelical 
history),  and  the  regular  development  of  modern  speculation,  see  the  Introduc- 
tion to  the  useful  work  of  Ebrard,  Wissenschaftliche  Kritik  der  ecangelischen 
Geschichte,  $  2—7,  p.  3  sq.  (ed.  2). 

2  See  Preface  to  Commentary  on  the  Philippians,  Colossians,  and  Philemon, 
p.  x. 

3  The  following  remark  of  this  thoughtful  writer  deserves  consideration :  "  On 
se  fait  une  idole  de  la  verite  meme :  car  la  verite  hors  de  la  charite  n'est  pas 
Dieu ;  elle  est  son  image,  et  une  idole  qu'il  ne  faut  point  aimer,  ni  adorer;  et 
encore  moins  faut-il  aimer  et  adorer  son  contraire,  qui  est  le  meusouge."  Pen- 
sees,  II.  17.  74,  p.  297  (Didot,  1846). 

4  It  does  not  seem  unjust  to  say  that  the  views  advocated  in  the  most  recent 
history  of  civilization  that  has  appeared  in  this  country  (Buckle,  History  <>/  '  V>. 
ilization,  Lond.  1858)  cannot  be  regarded  as  otherwise  than  plainly  hostile  to 
Christianity.  There  is  a  special  presupposition  in  viewing  the  history  of  Christ 
in  its  relation  to  the  world,  which  such  writers  as  Mr.  Buckle  unhappily  either 
scorn  or  reject, —  a  presupposition  which  a  historian  of  a  far  higher  strain  has 
well  defined  as  the  root  of  all  our  modern  civilization,  and  as  that  from  which 
civilization  can  never  separate  itself,  without  assuming  an  entirely  changed 
form.;  "it  is  the  presupposition  that  Jesus  is  the  Sou  of  God.  in  a  sense  which 
cannot  be  predicated  of  any  human  being, —  the  perfect  image  of  the  supreme 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  23 

that  restless  energy  that  belongs  to  "  the  walkers  in  dry- 
places,"  to  make  us  regard  as  imaginary  or  illusory  those 
holy  prepossessions  in  reference  to  the  Evangelical  history, 
that  ought,  and  were  designed  by  God  himself,  to  exercise 
their  unquestioned  influence  and  sovereignty  over  our 
whole  inner  life.1 

It  is  this  feeling  that  has  more  especially  led  me  to  fix 
upon  the  Life  of  our  Lord  and  Master  as  the  subject  of 
these  Lectures.  It  is  the  deep  feeling,  that  every  effort, 
however  humble  and  homely,  to  set  forth  the  groupings, 
the  harmonies,  and  the  significances  of  that  holy  History, 
is  a  contribution  to  the  spiritual  necessities  of  our  own 
times,  that  has  now  moved  me  to  enter  upon  this  lofty 
theme.  Here  it  is,  and  here  only  is  it,  that  our  highest 
ideal  conceptions  of  perfection  find  only  still  higher  prac- 
tical realizations.  Here  it  is  that,  while  we  humbly  strive 
to  trace  the  lineaments  of  the  outward,  we  cannot  fail,  if 
we  be  true  to  God  and  to  our  own  souls,  to  feel  the  Avork- 
ings  of  the  inward,2  and  while  the  eyes  dwell  lovingly  on 


personal  God  in  the  form  of  that  humanity  that  was  estranged  from  Him;  the 
presupposition  that  in  Him  appeared  the  source  of  the  divine  iif'e  itself  iu 
humanity,  and  that  by  Him  the  idea  of  humanity  was  realized."  Neander, 
Leben  Jesu  Chr.  p.  5  (Transl.  §  2,  p.  5,  Bohn).  Contrast  with  this  the  unhappy 
and  self-contradictory  comments  of  Hase.  Leben  Jesu,  §  14,  p.  16. 

1  It  has  been  well  said  by  Ebrard,  "  We  do  not  enter  on  the  Evangelical  His- 
tory, with  spy-glass  in  hand,  to  seek  our  own  credit  by  essaying  to  disclose  ever 
fresh  instances  of  what  is  contradictory,  foolish,  or  ridiculous,  but  with  the 
faithful,  clear,  and  open  eye  of  him  who  joyfully  recognizes  the  good,  the  beau- 
tiful, and  the  noble,  wheresoever  he  linds  it,  and  on  that  account  finds  it  with 
joy,  and  never  lays  aside  his  favorable  prepossession  till  he  is  persuaded  of  the 
contrary.  We  give  ourselves  up  to  the  plastic  influence  of  the  Gospels,  live  in 
tin  in,  and  at  the  same  time  secure  to  ourselves,  while  we  thus  act  in  the  spirit  of 
making  all  our  own,  a  deeper  insight  into  the  unity,  beauty,  and  depth  of  the 
Evangelical  History.*'  —  Kritik  tier  Evamg.  Geschichte,  §  8,  p.  38. 

-  It  is  satisfactory  to  find  in  most  of  the  higher  class  of  German  writers  on  the 
Life  of  our  Lord  a  distinct  recognition  of  this  vital  principle  of  the  Gospel  nar- 
rative: '•  As  man's  limited  intellect  could  never,  without  the  aid  of  God's  revela- 
tion of  Himself  to  the  spirit  of  man,  have  originated  the  idea  of  (iod,  so  the 
image  of  Christ  could  never  have  sprung  from  the  consciousness  of  sinful 
humanity,  but  must  be  regarded  as  the  reflection  of  the  actual  life  of  such  a 
Christ  It  is  Christ's  self-revelation,  made,  through  all  generations,  in  the  frag- 
ments of  His  history  that  remain,  and  in  the  workings  of  His  Spirit  which 
inspires  these  fragments,  and  enables  us  to  recognize  in  them  one  complete 


24  INTRODUCTORY    CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE      Lect.  I. 

the  inspired  outlines  of  the  history  of  Jesus,  and  of  Him 
crucified,  to  feel  His  image  waxing  clearer  in  the  soul,  His 
eternal  sympathies  mingling  with  our  infirmities,  and  en- 
larging into  more  than  mortal  measures  the  whole  spiritual 
stature  of  the  inner  man.1 

After  this  lengthened,  but  I  believe  not  unnecessary  in- 
troduction, let  me,  with  fervent  prayer  for  grace  and  assist- 
ance from  the  illuminating  Spirit  of  God,  at  once  address 
myself  to  my  arduous  and  responsible  task. 
Method  adopted         (I-)  And  first>   as   to   tbe  method  which, 

in  these  Lectures.  ^^  ^  ^elp  of  qq^  j  inten^  to  pursue. 

My  first  object  in  these  Lectures  is  to  arrange,  to  com- 
ment upon,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  to  illustrate,  the  prin- 
cipal events  in  our  Redeemer's  earthly  history;  to  show 
their  coherence,  their  connection,2  and  their  varied  and  sug- 
gestive meanings  ;  to  place,  as  far  as  may  be  safely  attempt- 
ed, the  different  divine  discourses  in  their  apparently  true 
positions,  estimated  chronologically,3  and  to  indicate  how 

whole."  —  Neander,  LebenJesu  Chr.  p.  6  (Transl.  §  3,  p.  4,  Bohn).  See  further  the 
eloquent  remarks  of  Dr.  Lange,  in  the  introduction  to  his  valuable  work,  Das 
Leben  Jesu  nach  den  Evangelien,  1. 1.  6,  Vol.  i.  p.  71  sq.  (Heidelb.  1844),  and  com- 
pare the  introductory  comments  of  Ewald,  Geschichte  Christus\  pp.  xi.  xii. 

1  The  admirable  introductory  exhortation  of  Bp.  Taylor,  prefixed  to  his  Life 
of  Christ,  deserves  particular  attention.  The  prayer  with  which  it  concludes  is 
one  of  the  most  exalted  of  those  rapt  devotional  outpourings  which  illustrate 
and  adorn  that  great  monument  of  learning  and  piety. 

2  On  the  two  methods  of  relating  the  events  of  our  Lord's  life,  whether  by 
adhering  strictly  to  chronological  sequence,  or  by  grouping  together  what  seems 
historically  similar,  see  Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §  16,  p.  17.  The  latter  method  is 
always  precarious,  and  in  some  cases,  as,  for  example,  in  the  Leben  Jesu  Cliristi 
of  Neander,  tends  to  leave  the  reader  with  a  very  vague  idea  of  the  real  connec- 
tions of  the  history. 

3  It  may  perhaps  be  safely  affirmed,  and  many  parts  of  the  succeeding  lectures 
will  serve  to  illustrate  the  truth  of  the  remark,  that  the  exact  chronological 
position  of  all  our  Lord's  discourses  can  never  be  satisfactorily  ascertained.  One 
of  the  most  sharp-sighted  and  trustworthy  of  modern  chronologers  of  our  Lord's 
life  prudently  observes:  "  I  will  not  deny  that  the  chronology  of  the  discourses 
of  our  Lord,  and  especially  of  all  the  separate  discourses,  is  very  hard  to  be 
ascertained;  nay,  the  problem,  viewed  under  its  most  rigorous  aspects,  owing  to 
the  nature  of  the  evangelical  accounts  that  have  come  down  to  us,  — I  refer  par- 
ticularly to  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  in  which  especially  so  many  of  these 
portions  of  discourses  occur,  —  is  perhaps  never  to  be  solved."  —  Wieseler,  Chro- 
nologische  Synopse,  p.  287.  Compare,  too,  Stier,  Reden  Jesu,  Vol.  i.  p.  xi.  (Transl. 
Vol.  i.  p.  7,  Clark). 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF  THE   FOUR  GOSPELS.  25 

they  both  give  to  and  receive  illustration  from  the  out- 
ward events  with  which  they  stand  in  more  immediate 
connection. 

But  all  this  must  be,  and  the  very  nature  of  the  subject 
prescribes  that  it  should  be,  subordinated  to  the  desire  to 
set  forth,  in  as  much  fulness  and  completeness  as  my  limits 
may  permit,  not  only  the  order  and  significance  of  the  com- 
ponent features,  but  the  transcendent  picture  of  our  Re- 
deemer's life,  viewed  as  one  divine  whole.1  Without  this 
ulterior  object  all  such  labor  is  worse  than  in  vain.  With- 
out this  higher  aim,  the  divine  harmonies  of  our  Master's 
life  become  lost  in  mere  annalistic  detail;  the  spiritual 
epochs  of  His  ministry  forgotten  in  the  dull,  earthly  study 
of  the  varied  problematical  arrangements  of  contested  his- 
tory. These  last  points  the  nature  of  my  present  office  may 
compel  me  not  to  leave  wholly  untouched ;  nay,  I  trust  that 
those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  nature  of  such  investiga- 
tions will  hereafter  perceive  that  I  have  not  shrunk  from 
entering  into  this  very  difficult  and  debatable  province  of 
our  subject,  and  that  opinions  are  not  put  forth  without  some 
knowledge  of  what  has  been  urged  against  them.  Still,  the 
details  will  not  appear  in  the  text  of  the  Lectures,  or  ap- 
pear only  in  affirmative  statements  that  are  subordinated  to 
the  general  current  and  spirit  of  the  narrative. 

O,  let  us  not  forget,  in  all  our  investigations,  that  the 
history  of  the  life  of  Christ  is  a  history  of 
redemption,  —  that  all  the  records  which  the     .  CafminaPi«u- 

■*  tng  the  above. 

Eternal  Spirit  of  truth  has  vouchsafed  to  us 

bear  this  indelible  impress,  and  are  only  properly  to  be  seen 

1  "  It  is  the  problem  of  faith,''  pays  Dr.  Lange,  "  to  introduce  into  the  church's 
contemplation  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  viewed  as  a  whole,  more  and  more  of  the 
various  features  of  the  gospel  narrative,  regarded  in  their  consistent  relations 
with  one  another.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  the  problem  of  theological  Boience  to 
endeavor  to  exhibit  more  and  more,  by  successive  approximations,  the  com- 
pleted unity  of  the  life  of  Jesus  from  the  materials  ready  to  its  hand.''  —  I,<  bt  a 
./<■.*»,  i.  7.  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  288.  Some  thoughtful  remarks  on  the  contrast  between 
the  ideal  and  the  outward  manifestation  of  the  same  {Gegensatz  zwischen  tier 
/,/•,-  mi,/  der  Eracheimmg)  in  the  lives  of  men,  but  the  perfect  harmony  of  this 
ideal  and  phenomenal  in  Christ,  will  be  found  in  Meander,  LebenJesu  Chr.  p.  9. 

3 


26  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON  TUE       Lect.  I. 

and  understood  from  this  point  of  contemplation.1  It  is 
the  history  of  the  Redeemer  of  our  race  that  the  Gospels 
present  to  us ;  the  history,  not  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  but  of 
the  Saviour  of  the  world ;  the  record,  not  of  merely  ideal- 
ized perfections,2  but  of  redemptive  workings, —  "My 
Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work : "  and  he 

John  v.  17. 

who  would  presume  to  trace  out  that  blessed 
history,  without  being  influenced  by  this  remembrance  in 
all  his  thoughts  and  words,  must  be  prepared  to  find  him- 
self adding  one  more  unhonored  name  to  the  melancholy 
list  of  those  who  have  presumed  to  treat  of  these  myste- 
ries, with  the  eclectic  and  critical  spirit  of  the  so-called 
biographer,  —  the  biographer 3  (O,  strangely  inappropriate 

and   unbecoming   word)  of   Him   in  whom 
Coi.  a.  9. 

dAvelt  the  whole  fulness  of  the  Godhead. 

hJonj™  °f   ^  (**•)      IU    t]ie  neXt    PlilCe   a  f<5W  WOrtls    mUSt 

on  this  occasion  necessarily  be  said  both  on 
the  sources  of  our  history,  and  our  estimate  of  their 
divinely  ordered  differences  and  characteristics. 

1  Some  very  valuable  remarks  on  the  true  points  of  view  from  which  the 
Evangelical  History  ought  to  be  regarded  by  the  Christian  student,  will  be  found 
in  the  eloquent  introduction  of  Lange  to  his  Leben  Jcsu:  see  esp.  Book  i.  4.  6, 
Vol.  i.  p.  141  sq. 

2  Compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  i.  1.  5,  6,  Vol.  i.  p.  41  sq.  It  has  been  well 
remarked  by  Keander,  in  answer  to  Strauss,  that  the  picture  of  the  Life  of  Christ 
does  not  exhibit  the  spirit  of  the  age  in  which  it  appeared;  nay,  that  "the  image 
of  human  perfection  thus  concretely  presented  stands  in  manifold  contradiction 
to  the  tendencies  of  humanity  in  that  period;  no  one  of  them,  no  combination 
of  them,  dead  as  they  were,  could  account  for  it."  —  Leben  Jesu,  p.  6,  note  (Transl. 
p.  4,  Bohn).  The  true  conception  of  the  mingled  divine  and  human  aspects  of 
our  Lord's  life  has  been  nowhere  better  hinted  at  than  by  Augustine, — ''Ita 
inter  Deum  et  homines  mediator  apparuit,  ut  in  imitate  persona;  copulans  utram- 
que  naturam,  et  solita  sublimaret  insolitis  et  insolita  solitis  temperaret."  —  Epist. 
exxxvii.  3.  9,  Vol.  ii.  p.  519  (ed.  Migne). 

a  The  essential  character  of  biography  is  stated  clearly  and  fairly  enough  by 
Hasc  (Leben  Jcsu,  §  12,  p.  15),  but  the  proposed  application  of  it  to  the  life  of  our 
Lord  can  scarcely  be  delined  as  otherwise  than  as  in  a  high  degree  startling  and 
repulsive.  This  cold,  clear,  but  unsound  writer  seems  to  imagine  that  some 
height  can  be  readied  from  which  the  modern  historical  critic  can  recognize  the 
individualizing  characteristics  of  the  life  of  Christ  as  tin-  Evangelists  desired  to 
portray  them,  and  may  sketch  them  out  in  their  true  (?)  relations  to  the  time 
and  age  in  which  they  were  manifested.  Compare  the  somewhat  similar  aud 
equally  objectionable  remarks  of  Von  Amnion,  Geschichte  des  Lebai  Jesu,  Vol. 
i.  p.  vii.  (Preface). 


Lkct.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  27 

Our  sources  arc  the  four  Gospels,  four  inspired  narratives, 
so  mysteriously  overruled  in  their  interdependence,  that, 
regarded  from  the  point  of  view  in  which  the  history  of 
our  Lord  alone  ought  to  be  regarded,  —  viz.,  as  a  history  of 
redemption,  —  they  are  all,  and  more  than  all,  that  our  most 
elevated  conceptions  of  our  own  spiritual  needs  could  have 
sought  for  or  devised.  Such  words,  perchance,  may  sound 
strange  in  an  age  that  has  busied  itself  in  noting  down 
the  seeming  deficiencies  of  the  Gospels,  rather  than  recog- 
nizing their  divine  fulness;  that  looks  out  for  diversities, 
rather  than  accordances,1  and  that  never  seems  to  regard 
its  historical  criticism  with  more  complacency  than  when 
it  presents  to  us  the  four  inspired  witnesses  as  involved 
in  the  discrepancies  of  a  separate  story.2  Such  words,  I 
say,  may  sound  strange,  but  they  are  the  words  of  sober- 
ness and  truth;  and  I  will  be  bold  to  say  that  no  patient 
and  loving  spirit  will  ever  rise  from  a  lengthened  investiga- 
tion of  the  four  evangelical  records  without  having  arrived 
at  this  honest  conviction,  —  that  though  here  there  may 
seem  diiliculty  because  faith  is  to  be  tried,3  there  a  seeming 
discrepancy  because  we  know  not  all,  yet  that  the  histories 
themselves,  no  less  in  their  arrangements  and  mutual  rela- 
tions than  in  the  nature  of  their  contents,  exhibit  vividly 


1  A  popular  but  pound  article  (by  I'rof.  C.  E.  Stowe)  on  the  nature  of  the 
modem  assaults  upon  the  four  Gospels  will  be  found  in  the  Bibiiotkeca  Sacra 
for  1851,  pp.  603—629.  The  details  are  well  sketched  out  by  Ebrard,  Krilik  der 
Ev.  Oeschichte,  §  3 — 7,  p.  5  Bq. 

-  The  early  Church  was  fully  aware  of  the  discrepancies,  not  merely  in  detail, 
but  even  in  general  plan  and  outline,  that  were  deemed  to  exist  between  the 
Gospels,  but  she  well  knew  how  they  were  to  be  estimated  and  regarded:  ovSe 
yap  tovs  tvayy€\anas  (pa'niixev  av  inrevavria  iroieTe  a\\r]Kots,  6Tt  oi  fxtv  T(p 
aapKiKtS  tov  Xpiffrov  irAe'ov  eV^ffxoArj^Tjcra)',  oi  Se  rij  freoAoyla  -npoai^nav 
Kai  oi  /nil/  tK  toiv  icaS"  t/M"?>  °<  5e  £k  tov  inttp  r}fj.as  iTroi-fjffavTO  t?V  apxv"' 
ouVco  to  K-fipvy/xa  SieXS/xeuoi  -jrphs  to  xP^ctfJ-ov  ol^iai  ro7s  Sexo/ieVois,  Kal  ovrco 
irapa  tov  iv  aurols  Tvirov/xevoi  Ui'iv/j.aTos.  —  Grcg.  Isaz.  Orat.  xx.  Vol.  i.  p.  305 
(Paris;  1609.) 

8  "Ipsa  nihil  simplici  el  certa  fide  in  illo  permanere  debemus,  ut  ipse  aperiat 
Bdelibus  quod  in  se  absoonditura  est :  quia  sicut  idem  dicit  apostolus,  In  illo  sunt 
om/m  thesauri  sapu  ntice  <  t  sciential  adsoonditi.  Quos  non  propterea  abscondlt, 
ut  neget,  Bed  ut  absconditis  excitet  desiderium."— Augustine,  Sertn.  Ii.  4,  Vol.  v. 
p.  880  (ed.  Migne). 


28  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON  THE       Lect.  I. 

the  pervading  influence  of  that  Spirit  which  it  was  declared 
should  guide,  aye,  and  infallibly  has  guided, 

John  ocvi.  13.  .  .  . 

their  writers  into  all  truth.1  But  let  us  carry 
out  these  observations  somewhat  in  detail. 

Omitting,  on  the  present  occasion,  all  investigations  into 

the  more  distinctly  external  characteristics 
in  refelen7c"iTin-     of   the  Gospels,  whether   in  regard  of  the 

untal  character*-       general    agpect    Qf   thege    ilispired     doCUineiltS, 

or  the  particular  styles  in  which  they  are  com- 
posed, let  us  turn  our  attention  to  the  more  interesting  sub- 
ject of  their  internal  peculiarities  and  distinctions.  And 
yet  we  may  pause  for  a  moment  even  on  the  outward ;  for 
verily  the  outward  is  such  as  can  never  be  overlooked;  the 
outward  differences  and  distinctions  are  indeed  such  as 
may  well  claim  the  critical  reader's  most  meditative  consid- 
eration. We  may  note,  for  example,  the  pervading  tinge 
of  Hebrew  thought  and  diction2  that  marks,  what  we  may 
perhaps  correctly  term,  the  narrative3  of  St.  Matthew; 

1  The  language  of  Augustine  on  the  subject  of  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the 
Gospels  is  clear  and  decided :  "  Quidquid  ille  [Christus]  de  suis  factis  et  dictis  nos 
legere  voluit,  hoc  scribendum  illis  -tanquam  suis  manibus  imperavit.  Hoc  uni- 
tatis  consortium  et  in  diversis  officiis  concordium  niembrorum  sub  uno  capite 
ministerium  quisquis  intellexerit,  nou  aliter  accipiet,  quod  narrantibus  discipulis 
Christi,  in  Evangelio  legerit,  quam  si  ipsam  manum  Domini,  quam  in  i>roprio 
corpore  gestabat,  scribentem  conspexerit.'''' — De  Consensu  Evang.  i.  35,  Vol.  iii.  p. 
1070  (ed.  Migne);  comp.  in  Joann.  Tract,  xxx.  1,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1632. 

2  Nearly  all  modern  critics  agree  in  recognizing,  not  merely  in  isolated  words 
and  phrases,  but  in  the  general  tone  and  diction  of  the  first  Gospel,  the  Hebrais- 
tic element.  The  "  physiognomy  of  this  first  of  our  Gospels,"  to  use  the  lan- 
guage of  Da  Costa,  "  is  eminently  Oriental : "  the  language,  though  mainly 
simple  and  artless,  not  unfrequently  rises  to  the  rhythmical,  and  even  poetical, 
and  is  marked  by  a  more  frequently  recurring  parallelism  of  words  or  clauses 
(comp.  Lowth,  Prelim.  Dissert,  to  Isaiah,  p.  viii.  Loud.  1837)  than  is  to  be  found 
in  the  other  Gospels:  compare,  for  example,  Matt.  viii.  24 — 27,  with  Luke  vi. 
47—49,  and  see  Da  Costa,  The  Four  Witnesses,  p.  28  sq.  (Transl.  Lond.  1851). 

3  Perhaps  the  term  narrative  may  be  more  correctly  applied  than  any  other 
to  the  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew:  it  neither  presents  to  us  so  full  a  recital  of  details 
as  we  find  in  St.  Mark,  nor  the  same  sort  of  historical  sequence  which  we 
observe  in  St.  Luke,  nor  yet  again  the  same  connection  in  our  Lord's  discourses 
which  wc  observe  in  St.  John,  but  to  a  certain  extent  combines  some  distinctive 
features  of  all.  Antiquity  well  expressed  this  feeling  in  the  comprehensive  title 
to.  Xdyia  (1'apias,  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eo.cl.  iii.  39),  which  we  may  perhaps  suitably 
paraphrase,  as  1'apias  himself  seems  to  suggest  (by  his  subsequent  use  of  the 
terms  twv  Kvpianwv  koyioiv,  —  but  the  reading  is  not  certain),  as  Ta  imb  Xpta- 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OP  THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  29 

we  may  observe  the  more  isolated  though  more  unqualified 
Hebraistic  expressions,1  and  even  the  occasional  Latinisms,2 
that  diversify  the  graphic  but  more  detached  memoirs*  of 
the  exponent  of  the  preaching  of  St.  Peter; 4  we  may  trace 
the  Hellenic  coloring  that  gives  such  grace  ami  interest 
to  the  compiled  history  of  St.  Luke  ;5  we  may  recognize 

tov  \ex&*VTa  ^  vpaxbivra:  sec  Liicke,  in  Studieuu.  Kritiken  for  1833,  p.  501 
Bq.,  Meyer,  Kommentar.  uber  Matth.  p.  4,  note,  and  Lange,  Lcben  Jesu,  i.  5.  2, 
Vol.  i.  p.  161.  The  general  structure  of  this  Gospel  has  been  well  investigated  in 
a  programme  by  Earless,  untitled  Lucubrationum  Evangelia  Canomca  spectan- 
tiiua  1'ars  ii.  Lrlang.  1842.  As  essays  of  this  character  are  not  always  accessible, 
it  may  be  worth  noticing  that  the  learned  author  finds  in  the  Gospel  five 
divisions:  the  Jirst,  ch.  i. — iv.,  ver.  23—25  forming  the  epilogue;  the  second, 
cli.  iv.— ix.,  ver.  35— 38  similarly  forming  the  epilogue;  the  third,  ch.  X. — xiv.; 
the  fourth,  ch.  xv. — xix.  1,  2;  and  the  fifth,  ch.  xix.  3  to  the  end.    See  pp.  6,  7. 

1  We  may  especially  notice  the  occasional  introduction  of  Aramaic  words, 
most  probably  the  very  words  that  fell  from  our  Lord's  lips;  comp.  ch.  iii.  17, 
fioavtpyts;  ch.  v.  41,  TaXtda  kovixl;  ch.  vii.  34,  e<p<pa&d;  ch.  xiv.  36,  a/3/8a.  See 
Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses,  p.  89. 

2  These  have  been  often  specified ;  it  may  be  enough  to  notice,  cnreKOvXaraip, 
ch.  vi.  27;  £e<rT-f)s,  ch.  vii.  4,  8;  KevTvpiccv,  ch.  xv.  39,  44,  45,  and  the  use  of  Xa^~ 
kos  for  money,  ch.  vi.  8.  Some  good  remarks  on  other  peculiarities  of  the  style 
Of  St.  Mark,  especially  in  reference  to  his  adoption  of  less  usual  words  and  forms 
of  expression,  will  be  found  in  Credner,  Einleitung  in  das  N.  T.  §  49,  p.  102  sq., 
and  in  the  Introd.  of  Fritz,  Evang.  Marti,  p.  xiv.  sq.  The  assertion  that  this 
Gospel  was  originally  written  in  Latin,  and  the  appeal  to  a  so-called  Latin  orig- 
inal, have  been  long  since  disposed  of.  See  Trcgelles  and  Home,  Introduction  to 
the  .V.  T.  Vol.  iv.  p.  438. 

3  This  term  may  perhaps  serve  to  characterize  the  general  aspects  of  the  Gospel 
of  St.  Mark,  and  to  distinguish  it  from  the  more  distinctly  historic  Gospel  of  St. 
Luke;  it  also  seems  well  to  accord  with  the  spirit  of  the  statements  preserved  by 
Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  39.  A  few  remarks  by  De  Wette  on  the  characteristics 
of  this  Gospel  will  be  found  in  the  Studien  u.  Kritiken  for  1828,  p.  789.  See  also 
Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  I.  7.  2,  Vol.  i.p.  247;  and  for  details,  Da  Costa,  Four  Wit- 
nesses, p.  87  sq.,  Guerike,  Einleitung  in  das  X.  T.  §  39.  3,  p.  258  (ed.  2). 

4  It  is  perhaps  unnecessary  to  substantiate  this  assertion  by  special  quotations, 
as  the  connection  between  the  second  Evangelist  and  St.  Peter  seems  now  dis- 
tinctly admitted  by  all  the  best  modern  critics.  The  most  important  testimonies 
of  antiquity  to  this  effect  arc  Papias,  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  39,  Irenanis, 
lhvr.  in.  1,  Clem.  Alex.  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  vi.  11,  and  Origen,  ap.  lb.  vi.  25. 

5  If  in  the  Qrst  Gospel  we  recognize  the  Oriental  tinge  of  thought  and  diction, 
and  if  in  tin1  second  we  detect  some  traces  of  the  influence  of  Latin  modes  of 
thought,  and  of  a  primary  destination  for  Roman  converts,  we  can  scarcely  fail 

knowledge  in  the  third  Co-pel  the  impress  of  Greek  thought  and  culture 
(comp.  Jerome.  Comment,  in  Esaiam,  vi.  9),  and  in  its  well-ordered  and  often 
flowing  periods  to  discern  the  hand  of  the  Greek  proselyte;  comp.Col.iv.il, 
and  notes  in  loc.;  and  Bee  further,  Da  Costa,  The  Four  Witnesses,  p,  148,  Lange, 
Jesu,i.  7. 4,  Vol.  i.p.  263  Bq.,  and  for  some  details  in  reference  to  lan- 
guage, Credner,  Einleitung,  $  59,  p.  132  Bq.,  Guerike,  Einleitung,  §  40.  4,  p.  278, 

3* 


30  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON   THE       Lect.  L 

the  marvellous  and  divine  simplicity  of  the  longer  and 
more  collective  discourses 1  that  form  the  bulk  of  the  spir- 
itual2 and,  in  some  respects,  supplemental*  Gospel  of  St. 
John.  All  these  things  may  well  suggest  to  us  medita- 
tions of  the  freshest  interest ;  hut  as  they  belong  to  the 
critical  essay,  rather  than  to  the  popular  lecture,  we  shall  be 
wise,  perhaps,  to  confine  ourselves  now  only  to  the  more 
strictly  internal  peculiarities,  more  especially  those  which 
characterize  the  different  pictures  presented  to  us  of  our 
blessed  Lord  and  Redeemer. 

Let  us,  however,  never  forget  that  in  every  effort  to  set 

Patritius,  de  Evangeliis,  I.  3.  5,  Vol.  i.  p.  83  sq.  In  those  parts  (e.  g.  ch.  i.) 
where  we  find  a  clearly  marked  Hebraistic  coloring,  it  seems  natural  to  conclude 
that  we  have  before  us,  in  perhaps  not  greatly  changed  forms,  trustworthy  docu- 
ments, supplied  either  by  the  blessed  Virgin  (in  the  chapter  in  question)  or  other 
privileged  eye-witnesses  (comp.  ch.  i.  2)  and  ministers  of  the  word.  Compare 
Gersdorf,  Beitrdge  z.  Sprachcharacterisiik  des  N.  T.  p.  160  sq.,  Patritius,  de 
Evangeliis,  I.  3.  4,  Vol.  i.  p.  80;  and  for  some  general  comments  on  St.  Luke,  the 
good  lecture  of  Dr.  Wordsworth,  New  Test.  Vol.  i.  p.  130. 

1  The  discourses  of  our  Lord,  as  recorded  by  St.  John,  have  been  defined  by 
Schmidt  (Biblische  TJieologie,  §  3,  p.  23)  as  ;'  central,"  in  contrast  with  those  of 
the  Synoptical  Gospels,  which  he  calls  more  "  peripherisch."  The  observation  is 
fanciful,  but  perhaps  has  some  truth  in  it:  in  St.  John  the  Lord's  discourses 
certainly  seem  to  turn  more  on  His  own  divine  person  and  His  true  relation  to 
the  Father,  and  the  ideas  and  truths  which  flow  therefrom,  while  those  in  the 
Synoptical  Gospels  relate  more  frequently  to  the  general  facts,  features,  and 
aspects  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Comp.  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch.  §  35, 
p.  143. 

2  Compare  Clem.  Alex.  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  vi.  14,  "rbi>  ptuToi  'lwdvuvv 
eaxaTW  <Tvvi86vTa  oti  to  acnixariKa.  iv  ro?s  evayyeXlois  5e8?/Aa>Teu,  trporpa- 
•jreVra  vTrb  rwv  yyopl/xwv,  Tlvev/iiaTi  Seo^oprj&e'j'Ta,  irv  e  v  par  iko  v  iroirjcrai 
evayyeXwv.  The  same  distinction  is  preserved  by  Augustine :  — "  Tres  isti  Evan- 
gelista;  in  his  rebus  maxime  diversati  sunt  quas  Christus  per  humanam  carnem 
temporaliter  gessit:  porro  autem  Joannes  ipsam  maxime  divinitatem  Domini 
qua  Patre  est  aequalis  intendit."  —  De  Consensu  Evang.  I.  4,  Vol.  iii.  1045  (ed. 
Migne). 

3  This  character  of  St.  John's  Gospel  has  of  late  been  denied,  but,  as  it  would 
seem,  wholly  unsuccessfully.  That  this  was  not  the  special  object  of  that  sub- 
lime Gospel  may  be  fully  conceded  (see  Luthardt,  das  Johan.  Evang.  iv.  1,  Vol. 
i.  p.  109  sq.),  but  that  St.  John  wrote  with  a  full  cognizance  of  what  his  three 
predecessors  had  related,  that  he  presupposed  it  in  his  readers,  and  enlarged 
upon  events  not  recorded  elsewhere,  seems  almost  indisputable.  That  this  was 
distinctly  the  belief  of  antiquity  is  fully  conceded  by  Lucke,  Comment,  ilber 
Johan.  in.  13,  Vol.  i.  p.  187  (ed.  3).  See  especially  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  24; 
Jerome,  de  Viris  Ulustr.  cap.  9;  and  compare  the  expressions  in  the  Muratorian 
fragment  on  the  Canon,  reprinted  in  liouth,  Beiiq.  Sacrce,  Vol.  iv.  p.  3  sq. 
(ed.  1). 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS    OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  31 

forth  the  life  of  our  Master,  our  whole  superstructure  not 
only  rests  upon  the  four  Gospels,  but  has  to 
be  formed  out  of  the  elements  which  they  ttuofae}mirOo»- 
supply,  and  that  unsymmetrical  will  it  be  and  ]^^^fdtand 
incongruous,  unless,  like  wise  master-builders, 
we  learn  to  appreciate  the  inner  and  essential  distinctions 
between  the  precious  materials  which  we  are  presuming  to 
employ.  Here  has  been  the  grave  error  of  only  too  many 
of  those  who  have  taken  in  hand  to  draw  up  an  account 
of  those  things  that  are  fully  believed  among 
us.  Here  harmonies  have  foiled  to  edify  ;  here 
critical  histories  have  often  proved  so  lamentably  deficient. 
Nay,  I  believe  that  there  is  no  one  thing  which  the  long 
roll  of  harmonies  and  histories,  extending  from  the  days  of 
Tatian  down  to  our  own,1  teach  us  more  distinctly  than 
this,  —  that  no  true  picture  of  the  earthly  life  of  our  Re- 
deemer can  ever  be  realized,  unless  by  God's  grace  we 
learn  both  to  feel  and  to  appreciate  the  striking  individu- 
ality of  the  four  Gospels  in  their  portraiture  of  the  life  of 
Christ,  and  are  prepared  to  estimate  duly  their  peculiar  and 
fore-ordered  characteristics.2 

That  antiquity  failed  not  to  recognize  these  individu- 
alities, we  are  reminded  by  the  admirable  treatise  of  Augus- 
tine on  the  Consent  of  the  Evangelists,3 — a  treatise  from 


1  A  full  list  of  these  will  be  found  in  the  useful  but  unsound  work  of  Hase, 
Leben  Jesv,  §  21,  p.  21  sqq.,  and  a  shorter  and  selected  list  in  the  Harmonia 
Erangelica  of  Tischendorf,  p.  ix.  sqq.  Those  which  most  deserve  consideration 
seem  to  be,  Gerson,  Concordia  Evange/istarum  (about  1471);  Chemnitz,  Harmo- 
nia Quatuor  Evangelistarum  (vol.  i.  published  in  1593);  Lightfoot,  Harmony, 
etc.  of  the  JV.  T.  (Loud.  1(355);  Lamy,  Harmonia  sive  Concordia  Quatuor  Erati- 
gelistqrum,  Paris,  1G89;  liengel,  Eichtige  Harmonie  der  vier  Erangelien,  Tubing. 
1736;  Newcome,  Harmony  of  Gospels,  Dubl.  1778;  Clausen,  Tabula  Syiiopticw, 
Iluvnia?,  1829;  tireswell,  Harmonia  Evangelica,  Oxon.  1S40;  Robinson,  Harmony 
of  the  Four  Goipels,  Boston,  1845,  and  (with  useful  notes)  Lond.  (llelig.  Tract 
Society);  Anger,  Synopsis  Evangeliorum,  Lips.  1851;  Tischendorf,  Synopsis 
Evangelica,  Lips.  1851;  and,  lastly,  the  voluminous  work  of  Patritius,  de  Evan- 
geliis,  Friburg,  1853. 

2  See  some  good  remarks  in  the  Introduction  to  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  especially 
I.  3.1,  Vol.  i.  p.  98  sq. 

3  We  might  also  specify,  as  illustrative  of  this  view  of  the  individual  character 
of  the  four  Gospels,  the  ancient  and  well-known  comparison  of  the  four  Cios- 


32  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

which,  though  we  may  venture  to  differ  in  details,  we  can 
never  safely  depart  in  our  general  principles  of  combina- 
tion and  adjustment.1  No  writer  has  more  ably  maintained 
the  fundamental  position,  that  the  four  evangelical  records 
in  their  delineation  of  the  life  of  Christ  have  noticeably 
different  characteristics,  —  that  they  present  our  Redeemer 
to  us  under  different  aspects,2  —  and  that  these  four  histo- 
ries (to  use  the  simile  of  another  ancient  writer),3  though 
flowing  from  one  paradise,  go  forth  to  water  the  earth  with 
four  currents  of  different  volume  and  direction. 

It  was  the  neglect  of  these  principles  that  made  so  many 

of  the  laborious  harmonies  of  the  sixteenth 
iifZZnuLearlier     an^  seventeenth  centuries  both  valueless  and 

unedifying,  and  not  improbably  served  to  call 
out  that  antagonistic  criticism  which  in  these  later  days 
has  acquired  such  an  undue,  and,  it  must  be  said,  undesira- 
ble rn-ominence.4    These  earlier  efforts  we  may  have  never 


pels  to  the  four  living  creatures  mentioned  in  the  Apocalypse  (Irenasus,  JTcer.  in. 
1).  Though  later  writers  (Athanasius,  Augustine,  Jerome,  al.)  varied  somewhat 
in  their  adaptations  of  the  symbols  (see  Wordsworth,  Greek  Test.  Vol.  i.  p.  51), 
this  fourfold  comparison  may  be  considered  as  the  practical  manifestation  of  the 
belief  of  the  ancient  Church  in  the  distinct  individuality  of  the  four  Gospels. 
The  more  usual  order  and  application  of  the  symbols  is  stated  by  Sedulius  in  the 
following  lines,  which  may  bear  quotation  :  — 

Hoc  Matthscus  agens,  hominem  generaliter  implct, 
Marcus  ut  alta  fremit  vox  per  deserta  Leonis, 
Jura  sacerdotii  Lucas  tenet  ore  juvenci, 
More  volans  aquila;  vcrbo  petit  astra  Joannes. 

1  Augustine  appears,  from  his  own  statements,  to  have  taken  especial  pains 
with  this  treatise.  He  alludes  to  it  twice  in  his  commentary  on  St.  John  (Tract. 
oxii.  1,  Vol.  hi.  p.  TJ29,  and  again  Tract  cxvu.  2,  Vol.iii.  p.  1945),  and  in  both 
cases  speaks  of  it  as  composed  with  much  labor:  compare  also  his  Retractat'wnts, 
Book  ii.  ch.  16. 

2  See  especially  Book  I.  2,  3,  4  (Vol.  iii.  p.  1044,  ed  Mignefr  where  the  different 
aspects  under  which  our  Redeemer  was  viewed  by  the  Evangelist  are  specially 
noticed.  What  we  have  to  regret  in  this  valuable  treatise  is  the  somewhat  low 
position  assigned  to  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  the  author  of  which,  according  to  Augus- 
tine, is  but  the  "podissequus  et  breviator"'  of  St.  Matthew  (ch.  2).  Modern 
criticism  has  strikingly  reversed  this  judgment. 

3  Jerome,  Pnrf.  in  Matih.  cap.  4,  Vol.  vii.  p.  18  (ed.  Migne). 

4  I  regret  to  have  to  express  my  dissent  from  the  views  of  my  friend,  Dean 
Alford,  in  the  Introduction  to  his  New  Testament,  Vol.  i.  $  7.  Careful  investi- 
gation seems  to  justify  the  opinion  that  between  the  forced  harmonies,  which 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS    OP   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  33 

seen,  perhaps  never  heard  of.  We  may  smile  perhaps  at 
the  luckless  sedulity  that  deemed  it  necessary  to  assign  to 
St.  Peter  nine  denials  of  our  Lord,1  and  we  may  perhaps 
scarcely  believe  that  such  abuses  of  Evangelistic  harmony 
could  have  been  originated  by  one  who  cooperated  with 
Luther,  and  whose  works  were  not  without  influence  on 
his  contemporaries,  and  on  them  that  followed  him.  We 
may  perhaps  now  smile  at  such  efforts ;  but  still,  if  one  only 
looks  at  some  of  the  harmonics  of  the  present  century,  it 
seems  abundantly  clear  that  these  influences  are  even  now 
not  wholly  inoperative;2  and  that  efforts  to  interweave  por- 
tions of  the  sacred  narrative,  without  a  proper  estimate  of 
the  different  objects  and  characteristics  of  the  Evangelists, 
still  find  among  us  some  favor  and  reception.  In  our  de- 
sire, however,  to  reject  such  palpably  uncritical  endeavors, 
let  us,  at  any  rate,  respect  the  principle  by  which  they 
appear  to  have  been  actuated,  —  a  reverence,  mistaken  it 
is  true,  but  still  a  reverence  for  every  jot  and  tittle  of  the 
written  word ;  and  let  us  beware,  too,  that  we  are  not 
tempted  into  the  other  extreme,  —  that  equally  exagger- 

found  favor  in  older  times,  and  the  blank  rejection  of  evangelical  harmony, 
^  except  in  broadest  outlines,  which  has  been  so  much  advocated  in  our  own 
times,  there  is  a  safe  via  media,  which,  if  followed  thoughtfully  and  patiently, 
will  often  be  found  to  lead  us  to  aspects  of  the  sacred  narrative  which  are  in 
the  highest  degree  interesting  and  instructive.  Variations  are  not  always  neces- 
sarily inaccuracies:  could  we  only  transport  ourselves  to  the  right  point  of  view, 
we  should  see  things  in  their  true  perspective;  and  that  we  can  more  often  do  so 
than  is  generally  supposed,  has,  I  veuture  to  think,  been  far  too  summarily  denied. 
For  some  good  remarks  on  Gospel  harmony,  see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  5 
6qq.,  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses,  p.  1  sqq.  (Transl.). 

i  Oaiaader,  Harmon.  Evang.  p.  128  (Bas.  1561).  This  rigid  and  somewhat 
arrogant  divine  was  born  A.  d.  1498:  he  was  educated  at  Wittemberg,  and  after- 
wards at  Nuremberg,  in  which  latter  city  lie  became  a  preacher  at  one  of  the 
churches.  He  warmly  supported  Luther  in  his  attack  on  Papal  indulgences; 
but  afterwards  fell  into  errors  respecting  the  application  of  Christ's  righteous- 
ness and  the  divine  image,  which  he  appears  to  have  defended  with  undue  con- 
fidence and  pertinacity.  Sec  Mosheim,  Eccl.  Hist.  IV.  3.  2.  1,  Vol.  iii.  p.  357  (ed. 
Soames);  Tholuck,  Lit.  Anzeiger  for  1833,  No.  54;  and  for  a  short  notice  of  his 
life,  Schrbckh,  Kirchengeschichte  (Reformation),  Vol.  iv.  p.  572. 

2  I  fear  I  must  here  specify  the  learned  and  laborious  work  of  Dr.  Stroud 
(New  Greek  Harmony  of  the  Four  Gospels),  in  which  in  this  same  case  of  St. 
Tetcr's  denials  the  event  is  recounted  under  different  forms  seven  times;  see  the 
Introduction,  p.  clxxxix. 


34  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

ated  view  of  modern  times,  that  the  discordances  of  the 
sacred  writers  are  such  as  defy  reconciliation,1  and  that  all, 
save  the  great  events  in  the  history  of  our  Redeemer,  must 
ever  remain  to  us  a  collection  of  confused  and  incon- 
sequent details. 

In  one  word,  let  us  remember,  that  though  it  is  uncriti- 
cal, unwise,  and  even  presumptuous  to  fabri- 

JiuJicious  combi-  .  , 

Nation  the  true  prin-     cate  a  patchwork  narrative,  yet  that  it  is  not 

only  possible,  but  our  very  duty  to  endeavor 

judiciously  to  combine?     Let  us  remember  that  we  have 

four  holy  pictures,  limned  by  four  loving  hands,  of  Him 

who  was  "  fairer  than  the  children  of  men," 

Psal.  xlo.  2. 

and  that  these  have  been  vouchsafed  to  us, 
that  by  varying  our  postures  we  may  catch  fresh  beauties 
and  fresh  glories.3  Let  us  then  fear  not  to  use  one  to  see 
more  in  licrlit  what  another  has  left  more  in  shade:  let  us 


1  For  some  useful  observations  on  and  answers  to  the  extreme  views  that 
have  been  maintained  on  the  supposed  discrepancies  or  divergences  that  have 
been  found  in  the  Gospel  history,  see  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Geschiohte, 
§  19,  p.  71  sqq. 

2  Modern  writers  on  harmonistic  study  commonly  draw  distinctions  between 
Synopsis  and  Harmony,  and  again  between  Chronology  and  Order  of  Events 
(Akoluthie).  Such  distinctions  are  useful,  and  serve  to  assist  us  in  keeping  clearly 
in  view  the  principles  on  which  our  combination  is  constructed.  The  problem, 
however,  we  have  to  solve  can  really  be  regarded  under  very  simple* aspects: 
it  is  merely  this,  (1)  to  determine,  where  possible,  by  reference  to  chronological 
data,  the  order  and  connection  of  events;  (2)  to  reconcile  any  striking  diver- 
gences we  may  meet  with  in  accounts  of  the  same  event;  compare  Chemnitz, 
Harmon.  Quatuor.  Evang.  Proem,  cap.  5.  In  regard  of  (2)  we  must  be  guided 
by  the  results  of  a  sound  exegesis  of  each  one  of  the  supposed  discordant  pas- 
sages, combined  with  a  just  appreciation  of  the  apparently  leading  aims,  objects, 
and  characteristics  of  the  inspired  records  to  which  they  respectively  belong. 
In  regard  of  (1),  where  chronology  fails  us,  we  can  only  fall  back  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  Chemnitz: —  "Nos  quxrimus  ordinem,  cujus  rationes,  si  non  semper 
certae  et  ubique  manifests,  probabiles  tamen  ncc  absurdae  nee  vero  absimiles 
reddi  posennt."  —  Harmonia  Evang.  Vol.  i.  p.  18  (Ilamb.  1704). 

3  Compare  with  this  the  judicious  observations  of  Da  Costa:  —  "To  picture 
Christ  to  the  eye  in  cqua\  fulness,  that  is,  as  an  actual  whole,  and  that  in  all  His 
aspects,  one  witness  was  very  far  from  being  sufficient;  but  Divine  wisdom 
could  here  accomplish  its  object  by  means  of  a  fourfold  testimony  and  a  four- 
sided  delineation.  In  order  to  this,  it  was  meet  that  each  of  four  Evangelists 
should  represent  to  us,  not  only  the  doings  and  sayings,  but  the  very  person  of 
the  Saviour,  from  his  own  individual  point  of  view,  and  in  harmony  with  his 
own  personal  character  and  disposition." —  The  Four  Witnesses,  p.  113  (Trausl.). 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF  THE  FOUR   GOSPELS.  35 

scruple  not  to  trace  the  lineament  that  one  has  left  unex- 
pressed, but  another  has  portrayed.  Let  us  do  all  this, 
nothing  doubting;  but  let  us  beware,  O,  let  us  beware, 
lest  in  seeking  to  work  them  up  mechanically  into  what 
might  seem  to  us  a  well-adjusted  whole,  instead  of  order 
we  bring  in  confusion,  distortion  instead  of  symmetry, 
burning  instead  of  beauty. 

Let  me  conclude  with  a  few  illustrations  of  those  inter- 
nal characteristics  and  individualities  of  the 
four  Gospels,  especially  in  reference  to  the     fc2£35i£ 
picture  of  our  Lord's  life,  to  which  I  have     '-'f ,''"  °bme  al' 

-I  '  Iwlcd  to. 

alluded,  and  so  prepare  ourselves  for  thought- 
ful recognitions,  in  future  lectures,  of  divinely  ordered  dif- 
ferences, and  for  wise  and  sober  principles  of  combination. 
How  striking  is  the  coincidence  between  the  peculiar 
nature  of  the  contents  of  the  Gospel  of  St. 

1  Individuality  nf 

Matthew  and  what  Scripture  relates  to  us  of  st.  Matthew's  gos- 
the  position  of  Jam  that  wrote  it.  How  natu- 
rally we  might  expect  from  him  who  sat  at  the  receipt  of 
custom  on  the  busy  shores  of  the  lake  of  Genncsareth,  and 
who  had  learnt  to  arrange  and  to  methodize  in  the  callings 
of  daily  life,  —  how  naturally  we  might  expect  careful 
grouping  and  well-ordered  combination.1  And  how  truly 
we  find  it!  To  leave  unnoticed  the  vexed  question  of  the 
exact  nature  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,2 — to  whom  save 
to  St.  Matthew  do  we  owe  that  effective  grouping  of  par- 
ables which  we  find  in    the   thirteenth  chapter,3  wherein 

1  See  the  thoughtful  comments  of  Longe,  Lcbcn  Jcsit,  I.  7.  2.  Vol.  i.  p.  237  sq. 
li  iiiii\  perhaps  be  urged  thai  we  are  here  tacitly  assuming  that  the  details  ofthe 
office  nf  a  TtAuSi/Tjs  were  more  in  harmony  with  modern  practice  than  can 
actually  be  demonstrated.  That  an  apxn^Xwvris  (mbmagistro)'wa&  especially 
concerned  with  administrative  details  can  be  distinctly  shown,  but  that  the 
simple  collector  [portitor),  such  as  St.  Matthew  probably  was.  had  any  duties  of 
an  analogous  nature,  may  he  regarded  as  doubtful.  Theverj  necessities  of  the 
case,  however,  imply  that  the  "portitor"  would  have  to  render  constant 
accounts  to  his  superior  officer,  —  and  this  Beems  quite  enough  to  warrant  the 
comments  in  the  text.  See  Smith,  Diet,  qf  Antiq.  s.  v.  "  Publieani ; "  Jahn, 
Archceofoff.  Bibl.  J  211;  Winn-,  RecUmrterb.  s.  r.  •••'/oil,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  739  sq. 

-'  See  the*eomments  on  iis  probable  structure  in  Lecture  iv. 

3  In  this  chapter  we  have  the  longer  parables  of  the  Sower  (vcr.  3—9)  and  of 


36  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON  THE       Lect.  I. 

each  one  by  its  juxtaposition  imparts  additional  force  and 
clearness  to  those  with  which  it  stands  in  immediate  con- 
tact? "Whose  hand  was  it  save  the  wise  publican's  that 
wove  into  narrative  that  glorious  garland  of  miracles  of 
which  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters  are  nearly  entirely 
composed?1  Who  but  he  has  brought  together  in  such 
illustrative  combinations  the  Lord's  last  prophecies,  and  the 
partially  prophetic  parables  that  usher  in  that  most  solemn 
revelation  of  our  Redeemer  to  His  Church,  which  con- 
cludes with  the  twenty-fifth  chapter?2 

But   to   narrow  our  observations   to  that 

Especially  in  his 

portraiture  of  our  with  which  we  are  more  especially  concerned, 
— with  what  force  and  effect  are  the  contrasts, 
which  such  habits  of  combination  naturally  suggest,3  em- 
ployed in  presenting  to  us  vivid  and  impressive  aspects  of 
our  Redeemer's  history.    In  what  striking  antithesis  do  the 

the  Tares  and  the  Wheat  (ver.  24—30),  and  the  shorter  comparisons  of  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven  with  the  grain  of  Mustard  Seed  (ver.  31,  32),  Leaven  (ver.  33), 
the  Treasure  in  a  field  (ver.  44),  the  Merchantman  and  the  Pearl  (ver.  45,  46), 
and  the  Net  cast  into  the  sea  (ver.  47,  48).  The  illustrative  connection  that 
exists  between  these  parables  can  hardly  escape  the  notice  of  the  observant 
reader.  We  have,  as  it  were,  seven  varied  aspects  of  the  kingdom  of  God  on 
earth.  In  the  first  parable  we  have  placed  before  us  the  various  classes  in  the 
visible  Church ;  in  the  second  we  contemplate  the  origin  and  presence  of  evil 
therein,  and  its  final  removal  and  overthrow;  in  the  third  we  see  the  kingdom 
of  God  in  its  aspects  of  growth  and  extension;  in  the  fourth  in  its  pervasive 
and  regenerative  character;  in  the  fifth  and  sixth  in  reference  to  its  precious- 
ness,  whether  as  discovered  accidentally  or  after  deliberate  search ;  in  the 
seventh  in  its  present  state  of  inclusiveness  combined  with  its  future  state  of 
selection  and  unsparing  separation.  See  Wordsworth,  New  Test.  Vol.  i.  p.  39; 
and  compare  Knox,  Remains,  Vol.  i.  pp.  407 — 425. 

1  In  these  two  chapters  we  have  the  narrative  of  the  cleansing  of  a  leper  (viii. 
2 — 4);  the  healings  of  the  centurion's  servant  (viii.  5— 13),  of  St.  Teter's  wife's 
mother  (viii.  14,  15),  and  of  numerous  demoniacs  (viii.  16);  the  stilling  of  the 
winds  and  sea  (viii.  24—26);  the  healing  of  the  demoniacs  of  Gadara  (viii.  28 — 
34);  of  the  paralytic  on  his  bed  (ix.  2—8),  and  of  the  woman  with  an  issue  of 
blood  (ix.  20— 22);  the  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter  (ix.  23—25),  the  healing  of 
two  blind  men  (ix.  28—30),  and  tlie  dispossession  of  a  dumb  demoniac  (ix.  32—34). 

2  Especially  the  similitude  of  the  Unready  Servant  (xxiv.  43—51),  and  the 
parables  of  the  Ten  Virgins  (xxv.  1—12).  and  of  the  Talents  (xxv.  14—30.) 

3  Compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  I.  7.  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  240.  The  outlines  and  general 
construction  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  are  described  by  Ebrard,  Kritil;  der  Evang. 
CescliicJite,  §  22,  p.  86  sq.,  but  not  under  any  very  novel  or  suggestive  aspects. 
For  some  remarks  on  the  characteristic  peculiarities  of  this  Gospel,  see  Davidson, 
Introduction  to  N.  T.  Vol.  i.  p.  52  sq. 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE  FOUR   GOSPELS.  37 

opening  chapters  set  before  us  the  new-born  King  of  Peace 
and  the  savage  Herod;  the  mysterious  adora-       Ch.a.i,s. 
tion  of  the  Magi,  and  the  hasty  flight  for  life 
into  a  strange  land  ;  the  baptism,  with  the        ch-  "• U|  **■ 
opened  heavens  and  descending  Spirit,  and 
the  temptation,  with  all  its  circumstances  of     cAi7i'.'i n. *7 '( "" 
satanic  trial.     Observe  too,  how,  thus  height- 
ened  by  contrast   as  well  as   heralded  by  prophecy,  the 
Lord  appears  to  us  as  the  Son  of  David  and 
the  Son  of  Abraham,  the  spiritual  King  of 
spiritual  Judaism,  the  Messiah  of  the  Israel  of  God.1     Yet 
withal  observe  how  the  Theocratic  King  and  the  suffering 
Messiah  pass  and  repass  before  our  eyes,  in  ever  new  and 
ever  striking  interchange,  and  how  a  strange  and  deep  tone 
of  prophetic  sadness  blends  with  all  we  read,  and  prepares 
us  as  it  were  for  Gethsemane  and  Calvary;  and  yet  again, 
when  the  Lord  has  broken  the  bands  of  death,  whose  save 
St.  Matthew's  is  that  inspired  pen  that  records  that  out- 
pouring of  exalted  majesty,  "All   power  is   given   me   in 
heaven  and  in  earth"?  To  whom  save  to  the 

„  -,-,  , .  ,  ,         ~       .  Jfatt.  orxviii.  18. 

first   Evangelist  owe  we  the  record  of   that 

promise  which  forms  the  most  consolatory  heritage  of  the 

Church,   "Lo!   I  am  with   you  alway,  even 

unto  the  end  of  the  world"? 

No  less  strongly  marked  is  the  individuality  of  St.  Mark's 
Gospel.     No  less  clearly  in  this  inspired  rec- 
ord can  we  trace  the  impressible  and  fervid        ;"'""V'""W'"  °f 

1  St.  Murk's  Gospel 

character    which    we     almost    instinctively       Actsxu.u. 

ascribe  to  John  Mark,  the  son  of  Mary  (for  I 

hold  the  identity  of  the  Evangelist  with  the  nephew  of 


1  Compare  the  fragments  of  Ireneus,  taken  from  Possini,  Catena  Patrum,  and 
cited  in  the  various  editions  of  that  ancient  writer  (Grabe,  p.  471 ;  Massnet,  Vol. 

>.  p.  337);  it  is  as  follows:  T&  koto  MaT&cuw  diayyeAiuv  npbs  'lovSalovs 
typd(prp  ovtol  yap  eTreSv/xovv  irduv  ff<po5pa  eV  o"ire'p/.taTos  Aaj815  XpiarSv.  'O 
Si  MaT^a?os,  i<al  sti  ^uiKKou  ocpoSportpau  tx01"  TV"  Toialn-nv  tTndvfiiav,  irav- 
toiojs  e<T7rei/5e  -nXi-jpncpcipiav  irapexil>/  avrols,  ws  til)  (K  <nr4p/i.aTos  Aa/615  & 
Xpitn6s.  Atu  Kal  arrb  ytvtatois  aurov  ijp^aro.  Compare  Kbrard,  Kritik  d<  r 
Evcmg.  Qeschichte,  §  21,  p.  85. 

4 


38  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

Barnabas),1  —  to  Lira  that  seems  to  have  been  so  forward 
in  action,  and  yet,  on  one  occasion  at  least,  too  ready  to 
fall  away.  I  say  on  one  occasion  at  least,  for  there  are 
many  whose  judgment  demands  our  respect  who  also  find 
in  the  youn<?  man  with  the  hastily  caught-up 

Mark  xiv.  51.  J  °  -,,„,. 

linen  garment,  who  followed  but  to  flee,  him 

who  alone  has  handed  down  to  us  that  isolated  notice.2 

Time  would  fail  me  if  I  were  to  name  all  the  many 

touches  that  stamp  this  impress  of  individuality  on  the 

work  of  the  second  Evangelist.     Do  we  not  recognize  his 

graphic  pen  and  his  noticeable  love  of  the  objective  and 

the  circumstantial  in  almost  every  event,  and  especially  in 

every  miracle,  which  he  has  been  moved  to  record  ?     Is  not 

this  plainly  apparent  in  the  narrative  of  the  healing  of  the 

paralytic,  in  that  of  the  Gaclarene  demoniac, 

mvVv.lllq.        m  tne  account  of  the  gradual  recovery  of  the 

Mark viu.j!2  sqq.     b]inci  man  of  Bethsaida,  and  in  the  striking: 

Mark  ix.  20  sqq.  '  O 

description  of  the  demoniac  boy  ?  Is  not  this 
to  be  felt  in  the  various  touches  that  diversify  almost  every 
incident  that  finds  a  place  in  his  inspired  record  ?  3  Is  it  not 


1  This  opinion  has  of  late  been  considered  doubtful  (see  Kienlen,  Stud.  u.  Krit. 
for  1843,  p.  423),  but  apparently  on  insufficient  grounds.  The  silence  of  Papias 
as  to  the  connection  with  Barnabas,  on  which  an  argument  has  been  based,  can- 
not fairly  be  pressed,  as  in  the  passage  in  question  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  39) 
Papias  appears  occupied  not  with  the  question  who  St.  Mark  was,  but  simply  with 
the  nature  of  the  testimony  which  he  delivered  and  his  dependence  on  St.  Peter. 
Ecclesiastical  tradition  seems  to  have  recognized  three  bearing  this  name, — the 
Evangelist,  John  Mark,  and  the  nephew  of  Barnabas;  but  for  such  a  distinction 
still  less  can  be  said.  Comp.  Coteler,  Constit.  Apost.  II.  57,  Vol.  i.  p.  2G5.  The 
opinion  of  Da  Costa  {Four  Witnesses,  p.  114  sq.),  that  St.  Mark  was  the  devout 
soldier  who  attended  on  Cornelius  (Acts  x.  7),  is  a  mere  fancy,  wholly  destitute 
of  even  traditional  testimony. 

2  Such  was  the  opinion  of  Chrysostom  (in  loc),  Gregory  the  Great  (Moral. 
Xiv.  23),  and  one  or  two  other  ancient  writers.  It  may,  however,  justly  be  con- 
sidered very  precarious,  as  the  common  and  not  unnatural  supposition  that  the 
young  man  was  a  disciple  does  not  seem  to  accord  with  the  comment  of  Papias, 
oijTf  yap  tfKovcre  rov  Kvplov,  oure  irapr)KoAou§Tio~ev  aurai,  ap.  Euseb.  Hist. 
Eccl.  m.  39. 

3  These  touches  are  very  numerous,  but  are  perhaps  more  easily  felt  than  speci- 
fied. We  may  notice,  however,  the  effective  insertion  on  three  occasions  of  the 
very  Aramaic  words  that  our  Lord  was  pleased  to  use  (ch.  v.  41,  vii.  34,  xiv.  36), 
of  the  emphatic  d/cou6T€  prefixed  to  the  parable  of  the  Sower  (ch.  iv.  3),  and  of 
the  words  of  power  addressed  to  the  winds  and  sea  (ch.  v.  39).    Sometimes 


Lect.  I.       CHARACTERISTICS    OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  39 

St.  Mark  that  presents  to  us  our  Master  amid  all  the  lone- 
liness and  horrors  of  the  wilderness,  "with  the  wild  beasts"? 
Is  it  not  he  who  brings  up,  as  it  were  before  our 
very  eyes,  our  Redeemer  on  the  storm-tossed 
lake,  "in  the  hinder  part  of  the  ship  asleep  on  a  pillow"? 
Is  it  not  he  who  so  frequently  and  precisely 

,       .  .  Mark  iv.  38. 

notes  almost  every  distinctive    gesture  and 

look,1  and  is  it  not  to  him  that  we  owe  the  last  touch,  as  it 

were,  to  that  afFectiner  picture  of  our  Lord's 

'  °     x  Markx.  16. 

tenderness  and  love,  when  lie  "  took  up  the 

young  children  in  His  arms,  and   put  His   hands   upon 

them,  and  blessed  them"? 

But  still  more  does  this  individuality  appear  —  and  with 
this  we  are   now  most   concerned  —  in   the 

Especially  hi  TtiB 

broad  and  general  picture  which  this  Evangel-  portraiture  V  our 
ist  presents  to  us  of  his  heavenly  Master.  If 
in  the  first  Gospel  we  recognize  transitions  from  theocratic 
glories  to  meek  submissions,  in  the  second  we  see  our 
Redeemer  in  one  light  only,  of  majesty  and  power.  If  in 
St.  Matthew's  record  we  behold  now  the  glorified  and  now 


details  are  brought  out  by  the  introduction  of  a  single  word  (ch.  xv.  43,  To\ft?j- 
oas),  sometimes  by  the  simple  use  of  a  stronger  expression  than  is  found  in  the 
corresponding  passage  in  the  other  Gospels  (compare,  for  instances,  Mark  i.  10, 
<7X'C°Mf''ol/s  tovs  obpavovs,  with  Matt.  iii.  16,  Luke  iii.  21;  ch.  i.  12,  (KflaWei, 
with  Matt.  iv.  1,  Luke  iv.  1;  ch.  ii.  12,  e^iaraa^ai,  with  Matt.  ix.  8;  ch.  iv.  37, 
j(IJ.i((adai,  with  Matt.  viii.  24,  Luke  viii.  23;  ch.  vi.  40,  cnroTa^dufvos,  with 
Matt.  xiv.  43;  ch.  xiv.  33,  iKda.fx&e'tada.i  i«xl  adn/xouuv,  with  Matt.  xxvi.  37), 
while  at  other  times  we  seem  made  conscious,  perhaps  merely  by  a  repetition  of 
a  word  or  phrase  (ch.  i.  14,  15,  ii.  16,  iv.  1,  xi.  28,  al.),  perhaps  merely  by  a 
strengthened  form  (e.  g.  cognate  accus.,  ch.  iii.  29,  iv.  41,  v.  42,  vii.  13,  xiii.  19), 
of  that  graphic  vigor  which  so  peculiarly  characterizes  the  record  of  the  second 
Evangelist.  The  single  parable  which  is  peculiar  to  this  Gospel  (ch.  iv.  20  sq.) 
may  be  alluded  to  as  bearing  every  impress  of  the  style  of  St.  Mark. 

l  Many  instances  of  this  could  be  cited:  we  may  pause  to  specify  the  all- 
embracing  look  {Trepi&KzTrtabai)  of  our  Lord,  which,  with  the  exception  of 
Luke  vi.  10,  is  noticed  only  by  this  Evangelist  (ch.  iii.  5,  34,  v.  32,  x.  23,  xi.  11), 
the  expression  of  inward  emotions  on  different  occasions  (ch.  vii,  34,  viii.  12.  x. 
14,  21),  and  the  very  interesting  fact  of  our  Lord's  heading  His  band  of  disciples 
on  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  mentioned  in  ch.  x.  32.  Compare  Da  Costa, 
Four  Witnesses,  p.  121;  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  i.  7-  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  179  sq. ;  Guericke, 
Einl<  Hung,  §  39.  3,  p.  208  note;  and  Davidson,  Introduction  to  X.  T.  Vol.  i.  p. 
160. 


40  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

the  suffering  Messiah,  in  St.  Mark's  vivid  pages  we  see  only 

the  all-powerful  incarnate  Son  of  God ;  the  voice  we  hear 

is  that  of  the  Lion  of  the  Tribe  of  Judah.     With  what 

peculiar  variety  of  expression  does  this   inspired  writer 

notice  the  awe  and  amazement  no  less  of  the  familiar  cir- 

ma-kx.su.  C^e  °f  tae  disciples  than  of  the  more  impres- 

Mark  ix.  h;  xi.     sible  multitude.     With  what  circumstantial 

1S-  touches    does   he    put    before    us    Him   on 

whose  lips  the    multitude  so  hung   that  they  had  scarce 

Mnrkiv.i.  room   to  stand,  or  time  to  eat,  —  Him  that 

Mark  at.  20;  vi.     wrourrht  such  wondrous  works  that  all  men 

31.  a 

Mark  v.  20.  did  marvel,  yea,  and  unbelieving  Nazareth 

Mark  vi.  2.  was  astonished, —  Him  whose  fame  was  spread 

Markvii.  36.  a\i  t]ie  more  that  He  sought  to  conceal  it, — 

Him  before  whose  feet,  "whithersoever   He 

entered,  villages  or  cities,"  the  sick  were  laid  out,  and  laid 

out  only  to  be  made  whole. 

These  things  can  escape  the  observation  of  no  attentive 
reader,  nor  will  they,  perhaj^s,  fail  almost  to  convince  him,  as 
they  have  almost  convinced  me,  that  he  whose  narrative, 
like  Stephen's  glance,  penetrates  beyond  the  clouds,  and 
tells  us  how  the  Lord  "was  received  up  into 
heaven  and  sat  down  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,"  was  John  Mark  the  Evangelist.1 


1  It  is  right  to  speak  with  diffidence  on  a  point  on  which  modern  critics  and 
commentators  (even  Dr.  Wordsworth)  have  judged  differently.  It  is  not  desira- 
ble here  to  enter  upon  a  criticism  of  external  evidence,  which  will  be  found 
clearly  and  ably  stated  elsewhere  (see  especially  the  critical  notes  to  the  new 
edition  of  Teschendorf  s  Greek  Testament;  Meyer,  Comment  on  St.  Mark,  p.  170 
6qq.;  and  Tregelles,  Printed  Text  of  the  N.  T.  pp.  246— 2G1),  except  to  remark 
that  the  only  clear  and  unqualified  external  evidence  against  the  passage  is  now 
reduced  to  B,  the  Latin  Codex  Bobbiensis,  some  old  MSS.  of  the  Armenian 
Version,  an  Arabic  Version  in  the  Vatican,  and  perhaps  we  may  add  Sevenis  of 
Antioch  and  Hesychius  of  Jerusalem  (see  Teschendorf,  /.  c),  —  the  testimonies 
of  Eusebius  and  Jerome  being  not  so  certain  (see  Wordsworth,  Four  Gospels,  p. 
127).  As  a  set  off"  against  the  arguments  founded  on  differences  in  the  use  of  a 
few  words  aud  expressions  (see  Norton,  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  i.  p.  219, 
ed.  2),  we  may  certainly  plead  the  circumstantial  tone  of  ver.  10  (ttcvSiovo-iv  ko\ 
K\aiovaiv),  of  ver.  12  (eV  krepa  ^loptprj,  iropfvofievots  eh  ayp6v),  the  specifica- 
tions, of  ver.  17  sq.,  —  against  which  the  objections  commonly  urged  seem  most 
noticeably  weak,  —  and  the  conclusion  of  ver.  19.    Why  may  not  this  portion 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  41 

Still  more  clearly,  if  it  be  possible,  can  we  recognize 
tbe  individuality  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke. 
Here  the  coincidences  between  the  nature  of  stflu^'allpcif 
the  history  and  what  we  know  of  him  who 
wrote  it,  —  the  wise  physician  of  Antioch,1  —  the  proselyte 
as  it  has  been  thought  of  the  gate,  —  the  only  one  of  the 
four  Evangelists  who  bore  in  his  body  the  mark  of  belong- 
ing to  the  wide  world  that  was  not  of  the  stock  of  Abra- 
ham,2 — meet  us  again  and  again,  and  press  themselves  upon 
our  attention,  in  ever  new  and  ever  suggestive  combina- 
tions. I  may  allude  in  passing  to  the  frequent  and  char- 
acteristic statement  of  the  circumstances  or  reasons  that 
gave  rise  to  the  events  or  discourses  recorded,3  which  we 

have  been  written  by  St.  Mark  at  a  later  period,  when  mere  verbal  peculiari- 
ties might  have  altered,  but  when  general  sentiment  and  style  might,  as  wo 
seem  to  observe  is  the  case,  remain  wholly  unchanged?  To  speculate  on  the 
causes  which  led  to  the  interruption  at  the  end  of  the  8th  verse  is  perhaps  idle. 
The  terrible  persecution  under  Nero,  a.  d.  64,  is,  however,  somewhat  plausibly 
urged  as  a  possible  period  when  the  Evangelist  might  have  suddenly  sought 
safety  by  flight,  leaving  the  record,  which  he  had  been  so  pressed  to  write 
(Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  II.  15,  vi.  14),  unfinished,  and  to  be  concluded  perhaps  in 
another  land,  and  under  more  peaceful  circumstances.  Conrp.  Norton,  Genuine- 
v<  H  <f  the  Gospels,  Vol.  i.  p.  221. 

1  Compare  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  4,  —  Aovkus  rb  nev  -yivos  &v  twv  air* 
'AcTJoxeioj ;  see  also  Jerome,  Catal.  Script,  cap.  16.  This  statement  has  been 
recently  considered  doubtful  (Winer,  RWB.  Art  "  Lucas,"  Vol.il.  p.  35;  Meyer, 
Einleituny,  p.  182),  and  due  merely  to  a  mistaken  identification  of  the  Evange- 
list with  Lucius  (Acts  xiii.  1),  but  apparently  without  sufficient  reason.  The 
recent  attempt  to  identify  St.  Luke  with  Silas  has  been  noticed,  but  refuted  by 
Dr.  Davidson,  Introduction,  Vol.  ii.  p.  20. 

2  This  has  been  usually  and,  as  it  would  seem,  correctly  inferred  from  Col.  iv. 
14,  where  St.  Luke  and  Demas  are  named  by  themselves,  and,  with  Epaphras, 
not  included  in  the  list  which  preceded  (ver.  10, 11)  of  those  who  were  of  the 
circumcision  ;  see  notes  in  loc. 

3  This  may  be  observed  especially  in  the  way  in  which  the  parables,  peculiar  to 
this  Evangelist,  are  commonly  introduced  into  the  sacred  narrative.  Compare 
eh.  vii.  39  sq.,  x.  30  sq.,  xii.  13  sq.,  xviii.  1.  and  very  distinctly,  xix.  11.  We 
may  also  here  specify  St.  Luke's  account  of  the  outward  circumstances  that  led 
to  our  Lord's  being  born  at  Bethlehem,  the  valuable  clew  he  gives  us  to  one  of 
the  significances  of  the  Transfiguration  (oh.  ix.  31),  the  notice  how  St.  Peter 
came  to  be  aimed  with  a  sword  (ch.  xxii.  33),  the  mention  of  our  Lord's  being 
first  blindfolded,  and  then  bidden  to  prophecy  who  struck  Him  (ch.  xii.  63; 
compare  Blunt,  Coincidences  of  the  Gospels,  No  xn.  p.  47);  and,  to  conclude  a 
list  which  might  be  made  much  longer,  the  allusiou  to  the  circumstance  which 
led  to  our  Lord's  being  taken  before  Herod  (ch.  xxiii.  C  sq.).  Compare  also 
Lange,  Leben  Jean,  i.  7-  2,  Vol.i.  p.  256. 

4* 


42  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

find  so  strikingly  in  this  Gospel.  I  may  notice  the  pecu- 
liarly reflective,  and,  if  I  may  use  the  term,  psychological 
comments,1  which  the  thoughtful  physician  so  often  passes 
on  the  actors  or  the  circumstances  which  he  brings  forward 
in  his  inspired  narrative. 

These  things  we  can  here  only  allude  to  in  passing; 

we  may,  however,  -with  profit  to  ourselves 
ow  zon/Tturc  °f    pause  somewhat  on  the  portraiture  of  our 

Redeemer  as  presented  to  us  by  this  Evan- 
gelist. If,  as  I  said,  St.  Matthew  presents  to  us  our  Re- 
deemer more  especially  as  the  Messiah,  the  Son  of  Abra- 
ham and  the  Son  of  David ;  if  St.  Mark  more  especially 
presents  Him  to  us  as  the  incarnate  and  wonder-working 
Son  of  God,  assuredly  St.  Luke  presents  Him  to  us  in  the 
most  wide  and   universal  aspects2  as  the  God-man,  the 


1  We  may  specify  a  few  instances;  e.  g.  the  passing  comment  on  tbe  as  yet 
imperfect  perceptions  of  Joseph  and  Mary,  ch.  ii.  50,  51;  the  notice  of  the 
expectancy  of  the  people,  ch.  iii.  15;  the  glimpse  given  us  of  the  inward  thoughts 
of  the  Pharisee,  ch.  vii.  39;  the  passing  remark  ou  their  spiritual  state  generally, 
ver.  30;  the  brief  specification  of  their  prevailing  characteristic,  ch.  xvi.  14;  the 
sketch  of  the  principles  of  action  adopted  by  the  spies  sent  forth  by  the  chief 
priests  and  scribes,  ch.  xx.  20;  the  notice  of  the  entry  of  Satan  into  Judas,  ch. 
xxii.  3,  and  the  significant  comment  on  the  altered  relations  between  Pilate  and 
Herod,  ch.  xxiii.  12.  We  may  remark  in  passing  that  the  difference  between 
these  comments  and  those  which  we  meet  with  in  St.  John's  Gospel  is  clear  and 
characteristic.  In  St.  John's  Gospel  such  comments  are  nearly  always  specially 
introduced  to  explain  or  to  elucidate  (comp.  ch.  iii.  23,  24,  iv.  8,  9.  vi.  4, 10,  23, 
71,  vii.  39,  xi.  2,  13,  al.);  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel  they  are  rather  obiter  dicta,  I  he 
passing  remarks  of  a  thoughtful  and  reflective  writer,  called  up  from  time  to 
time  by  the  varied  aspects  of  the  events  which  he  is  engaged  in  recording. 
Comp.  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  I.  7.  2.  Vol.  i.  p.  256  sq. 

2  The  universality  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  has  been  often  commented  on.  Not 
only  in  this  Gospel  do  we  feel  ourselves  often,  as  it  were,  transported  into  the 
domain  of  general  history  (comp.  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses,  p.  154),  — not  only 
can  we  recognize  the  constantly  recurring  relations  or  contrasts  of  Judaism  and 
Gentilism  (Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch.  §  31,  p.  120),  —  not  only  may  we, 
with  most  modern  critics,  see  this  universality  very  distinctly  brought  out  in  the 
notice  of  the  mission  of  the  Seventy  Disciples  (Credner,  Einleitung,  §  60,  p.  144), 
but  we  may  trace  the  same  characteristic  in  some  of  the  recitals  of  leading 
events,  in  some  of  the  miracles  and  parables,  and  in  several  of  our  Lord's  iso- 
lated comments  and  observations.  Consider,  for  example,  ch.  ii.  31,  32;  iv.  27; 
ix.  1—6  (especially  when  contrasted  with  Matt.  x.  5 — 6),  ix.  52  sq.  x.  30  sq  ,  xvi. 
16,  xvii.  11  sq.,  xix.  38  (as  contrasted  with  Matt.  xxi.  9,  Mark  xi.  9,  10,  John 
xii.  13,  —  in  all  of  which  the  reference  is  to  the  theocratic  rather  than  to  the 
universal  King),  xxiv.  47 ;  and  compare  Patiitius,  de  Erangeliis,  i.  3.  5.  80,  Vol.  i. 
p.  92. 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS    OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  43 

Friend  and  Redeemer  of  fallen  humanity,  yea,  even  as  his 
own  genealogy  declares  it,  not  merely  the  Son  of  David 
and  the  Son  of  Abraham,  but  the  Son  of  Adam  and  the 
Son  of  God.1  With  what  affecting  delineation  does  He 
Mho  tenderly  loved  the  race  He  came  to  save  appear  to  us 
in  the  raising  of  the  son  of  the  widow  of 
Nain,  —  in  the  narrative  of  her  who  was  for-  ck.vH.ja. 
given  "because   she    loved  much," — in  the 

0  ,  Ch.xt\3  sfj.\  also 

parables  of  the  lost  sheep,  the  lost  coin,  and     mMtktt.xviU.  10. 
the  prodigal  son,  —  in   the   address   to   the     ck.sm.isq. 
daughters2  of  Jerusalem,  —  in  the  prayer  for 

°  .  .  Ch.  xxiii.  27  sq. 

those  who  had  crucified  Him,  —  in  the  gra-     ck.xxiu.9t. 
cious   promise   to   the   penitent    malefactor,     ch.xxm.io. 
vouchsafed  even  while  the  lips  that  spake  it 
were  quivering  with  agonies  of  accumulated  suffering. 

In  all  these  things,  and  in  how  many  more  than  these 
that  could  easily  be  adduced,  see  we  not  the  living  picture 
of  Him  who  was  at  once  the  Son  of  Man  in  mercy  and 
the  Son  of  God  in  power,  whose  grace  and  redemptive 
blessings  extended  to  both  Jew  and  Gentile,  and  who, 
even  as  He  is  borne  up  into  the  clouds  of  heaven,  passes 
from  our  view  in  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke 

.  .  Ch.  xxiv.  50. 

blessing   those  from  whom  He  is  parting;  — 
"  and  it   came   to  pass  while  He   blessed  them,   He  was 
parted  from  them  and   carried   up  into  heaven,  and  they 
worshipped  Him,  and  returned  to  Jerusalem  with  great 

joy"? 

On    the   internal    characteristics   of  the  Gospel   of  St. 

1  This  difference  did  not  escape  the  notice  of  Chrysostom;  'O  jxev  MaT^a7or, 
are  'EPpaiois  ypaipoiv,  ovShu  irKtov  £ (frjTTjcre  8e?|ai,  t)  on  airb  'APpaa/j.  Kal 
Aav'l'S  i\v  6  8e  Aovkus  are  Koivfj  irucrt  5ia\ty6/J.evos  Kal  auwrepco  rbv 
\iyov  avayei,  p.*xPl  T°v  'ASa/*  ■KpoXwv,  in  Matt.  Horn.  1.  p.  7  (ed.  Bened).  See 
also  Origen,  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  vi.  25.  and  the  comments  on  this  Gospel  of 
Ebrard,  Kritik  <h  r  Ev.  Geschichte,  §  31,  p.  120  sq. 

2  it  ma\  1m'  observed  that  consistently  with  the  characteristic  of  universality 
above  alluded  to,  St.  Luke  brings  before  QB,  more  frequently  than  the  other 
Evangelists,  notices  of  pious  and  ministering  women.  Com]),  eh.  ii.  86,  viii.  2, 
xxiii.  27,  66;  and  gee  also  vii.  37  sq.  The  same  feature  is  especially  noticeable  in 
the  Acts.  Comp.  ch.  i.  14,  viii.  12,  be.  2,  ix.  86,  xii.  12,  xvi.  1,11,  al.  Comp.  Da 
Costu,  Four  Witnesses,  $.  189  sq.,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Vol.  i.  259. 


44  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS    ON   THE      Lect.  I. 

John,  and  the  picture  that  is  there  vouchsafed  to  us  of  our 

Lord,  I  need  perhaps  say  but  little,  as  that 

individuality of    blessed  Gospel  is  to  so  large  an  extent  com- 

St.  Johns  Gospel.  l  ° 

posed  of  the  Redeemer's  ovvrn  words,  and  as 
modern  thought  no  less  than  the  meditations  of  antiquity 
seem  rarely  to  have  missed  seizing  the  true  aspects  of  the 
divine  image  of  the  Son  of  God  that  is  there  presented  to 
us.1  The  very  words  which  I  have  chosen  as  my  text 
declare  the  general  object  of  the  Gospel,  —  even  "that  we 

may  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  the  Son 

Ch.xx.  31.  *  . 

01  Grod ;  the  very  opening  words  suggest 
the  lofty  sense  in  which  that  sonship  is  to  be  understood  — 
"  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word 
was  God."  As  in  the  synoptical  Gospels  the 
Incarnate  Son  is  mainly  displayed  to  us  in  the  operative 
majesty  of  outwardly-exercised  omnipotence,  so  in  the 
fourth  Gospel  is  He  mainly  revealed  to  us  in  the  tranquil 
majesty  of  conscious  unity  with  the  eternal  Father.2  Here 
we  are  permitted  to  catch  mysterious  glimpses  of  the  very 
inner  life  of  our  redeeming  Lord  ;  we  behold  the  reader  of 
the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  human  heart,3  we  note  the 

1  The  excellent  work  of  Luthardt  (das  JohanneiscJie  Evangelium,  Niirnberg, 
1852)  may  here  be  especially  noticed.  In  this  the  reader  will  find  full  and  careful 
notices  of  all  that  is  peculiar  and  distinctive  in  this  Gospel,  an  exposition  of  the 
plan  of  development,  and  comments  on  the  component  parts  of  the  narrative. 
The  writer  is  perhaps  too  much  carried  away  by  his  theory  of  the  regular  and 
dramatic  structure  of  the  Gospel,  and  sometimes  too  artificial  in  his  analysis  of 
details,  still  his  work  remains,  and  will  probably  long  remain,  as  one  of  the  best 
essays  on  St.  John's  Gospel  that  has  ever  appeared.  For  a  review,  see  Reuter, 
Repertor.  Vol.  lxxxv.  p.  97. 

A  good  essay  on  the  life  and  character  of  the  Apostle  will  be  found  in  Liicke, 
Comment,  iiber  Joh.  §  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  6  sqq.,  and  some  useful  remarks  on  the  general 
plan  and  arrangement  of  the  Gospel,  in  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Ev.  Geschichte,  §  85, 
p.  141  sq.    See  also  Davidson,  Introduction,  Vol.  i.  p.  334. 

2  Compare  Augustine,  de  Consensu  Evang.  i.  5:  "Intelligi  datur,  si  diligenter 
advertas,  tres  Evangelistas  temporalia  facta  Domini  et  dicta  qua?  ad  iuformandos 
mores  vitae  presentis  maxime  valerent,  copiosius  persecutos,  circa  illam  activam 
virtutem  fuisse  versatos:  Joannem  vero  facta  Domini  multa  pauciora  narrantem, 
dicta  vero  ejus,  ea  praesertim  qua;  Trinitatis  unitatem  et  vita;  a;tern»  felicitatem 
insinuarent,  diligentius  et  uberius  conscribentem,  in  virtute  contemplative  com- 
mendauda,  suam  intentionem  pranlicationemque  tenuisse." — Vol.  iii.  p.  1046  (ed. 
Migne).    Compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  i.  7.  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  265  sq. 

3  This  seems  a  decided  and  somewhat  noticeable  characteristic  of  this  Gospel. 


Licct.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS    OF   TIIE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  45 

ever-present  consciousness  of  truest  and  innermost  union 
with  the  Father  of  Spirits.1  Yet  we  feel  rather  than  see; 
Ave  arc  made  conscious  rather  than  observe.  Here,  in  the 
stillness  of  our  hearts,  as  avc  read  those  heavenly  dis- 
courses, we  seem  to  feel  the  Son  of  God  speaking2  to  us 
"as  a  man  speaketh  with  his  friend;"  His 

,  .  .  .       -  ,  Exodus  xxiii.  11. 

image  seems  slowly  to  rise  up  before  us  ;  the 
ideal  picture  gathers  shape  ;  we  seem  to  see,  yea  in  exalted 
moments  we  do  see,  limned  as  it  were  in  the  void  before 
our  eyes,  "the  King  in  His  beauty;"  heaven 

.,  ,  .  -  Isai.  xxiii.  1 ". 

and  earth  melt  away  from  our  rapt  gaze,  we 
spiritually  behold  the  very  Redeemer  of  the   world,  we 
hear  the  reassuring  voice,  and  we  say,  with  a  conviction 
dec])  as  that  of  him  whom  this  Gospel  tells 

T  -.  -,  yi        i   „  J' if,  11  XX.  28. 

us  of,  "  My  Lord  and  my  God. 

On  the  picture  of  our  Lord   which  this  Gospel  presents 
to  us,3 1  am  sure  then  I  need  say  no  more.     I  will  only  in 


Sec,  for  example,  cli.  i.  47,  ii.  24,  iv.  17,  IS,  v.  42,  vi.  15,  Gl,  04,  xiii.  11;  compare 
xi.  4,  15.  It  may  be  observed  that  in  some  instances,  e.  g.  our  LoriTs  conversa- 
tion with  Xicodcnius,  a  remembrance  of  this  characteristic  will  greatly  assist  us 
in  understanding  the  true  force  of  our  Lord's  words.  It  would  certainly  seem, 
in  a  few  eases,  as  if  our  Lord  was  not  so  much  replying  to  the  words  of  the 
speaker,  as  to  the  thoughts  which  He  knew  were  rising  up  within.  Compare 
Meyer,  on  Jolt.  iii.  3;  Stier,  Ilerfcn  Jesu,  Vol.  iv.  p.  37C  sq.  (Clark). 

1  Compare  eh.  iii.  10,  35  sq.  v.  17  sq.  vi.  57,  viii.  42,  x.  15,  30,  xi.  42,  al.  It  may 
be  further  observed  that  it  is  in  St.  John's  Gospel  alone  that  we  find  the  title 
fi.oi>tryei/r]s  applied  to  the  Eternal  Son.  See  ch.  i.  14, 18,  iii.  16, 18,  and  compare 
1  John  iv.  9. 

-  In  this  Gospel  our  Lord  is  truly  to  us  what  the  significant  appellation  of  the 
inspired  writer  declares  Him  to  be,  —  the  Word.  In  the  other  Gospels  our 
attention  is  mainly  centred  on  our  Lord's  acts,  but  in  this  last  one  he  speaks. 
Sec  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses,  p.  240.  It  may  indeed  be  noticed  as  one  of  the 
striking  features  of  this  Gospel  that  it  makes  all  its  characters  exhibit  their 
individuality  to  us  by  what  they  say  rather  than  by  what  they  do.  We  may 
recognize  this  kind  of  self-portraiture  partially  in  the  case  of  Xathanael  (ch.  i. 
47si[.)and  Nicodemus  (cb.  iii.  1  sq.),  and  very  distinctly  in  that  of  the  woman 
of  Samaria  (eh.  iii.  7  sq.)  and  of  the  man  born  blind  (eh.  ix.  1,  30).  The  very 
enemies  of  onr  Lord  appear  similarly  before  us;  all  their  doubts  (ch.  viii.  22), 
divisions  (ch.  x.  19),  and  machinations  (ch.  xi.  47)  are  disclosed  to  us  as  it  were 
bj  themselves,  and  in  the  word.- that  fell  from  their  own  lips.  For  some  good 
remarks  on  the  Individualizing  traits  and  characteristics  of  those  who  appear  on 
the  pages  of  St.  John's  Gospel,  see  Luthardt,  Das  Jdhcmn.  Evang.  m.2,  Part 
i.  p.  OS  sq. 

s  lor  some  further  notices  and  illustrations,  see  especially  Luthardt,   Das 


46  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS   ON   THE       Lect.  I. 

conclusion  call  your  attention  to  the  mystical  complete- 
ness which  this  Gospel  gives  to  the  evangelical  history. 
I  will  only  ask  you  to  spend  a  moment's  thought  on  that 
everlasting  wisdom  by  which  it  was  fore-ordained  that  a 
Gospel  should  be  vouchsafed  to  us  in  which  the  loftiest 
ideal  purities  and  glories  with  which  we  might  be  able  to 
invest  the  Son  of  David,  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  Son  of 
Man,  might  receive  a  yet  loftier  manifestation,  and  by 
which  the  more  distinctly  historical  pictures  disclosed  to  us 
by  the  synoptical  Evangelists  might  be  made  instinct  with 
a  quickening  life,  which  assuredly  they  lack  not,  but  which 
we  might  never  have  completely  realized  if  we  had  not 
been  endowed  with  the  blessed  heritage  of  the  Gospel  of 
St.  John.1 

Johann.  Evang.  ill.  2,  p.  92  sq.,  and  for  comparisons  between  the  pictures  of 
our  Redeemer  as  displayed  to  us  in  this  and  the  three  other  Gospels,  Lange, 
Leben  Jesu,  I.  7.  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  271  sq.  Compare  also  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses, 
p.  286  sq. 

1  We  may,  perhaps,  profitably  close  this  comparison  of  the  characteristics  of  the 
four  Gospels  with  a  brief  statement  of  some  of  the  distinctions  which  have  either 
been  above  alluded  to,  or  may  be  further  adduced  as  evincing  the  clear  individu- 
ality of  each  one  of  the  inspired  records.  In  regard  of(l)  the  External  features 
and  characteristics,  we  are  perhaps  warranted  in  saying  that  (a)  the  point  of  view 
of  the  firstGospel  is  mainly  Israelitic;  of  the  second,  Gentile;  of  the  third,  univer- 
sal; of  the  fourth,  Christian;  — that(6)  the  general  aspect  and,  so  to  speak,  physi- 
ognomy of  the  first  mainly  is  Oriental;  of  the  second,  Roman;  of  the  third,  Greek; 
of  the  fourth,  spiritual; — that  (c)  the  style  of  the  first  is  stately  and  rhythmical; 
of  the  second,  terse  and  precise;  of  the  third,  calm  and  copious;  of  the  fourth, 
artless  and  colloquial;  —  that  (</)  the  most  striking  characteristic  of  the  first  is 
symmetry;  of  the  second,  compression;  of  the  third,  order;  of  the  fourth,  sys- 
tem;—  that(e)  the  thought  and  language  of  the  first  are  both  Hebraistic;  of 
the  third,  both  Hellenistic;  while  in  the  second  the  thought  is  often  Occidental 
though  the  language  is  Hebraistic;  and  in  the  fourth  the  language  Hellenistic, 
but  the  thought  Hebraistic.  Again  (2),  in  respect  of  Subject-matter  and  con- 
tents we  may  say  perhaps  (a),  that  in  the  first  Gospel  we  have  narrative;  in  the 
second,  memoirs;  in  the  third,  history;  in  the  fourth,  dramatic  portraiture;  — 
(b)  that  in  the  first  we  have  often  the  record  of  events  in  their  accomplishment; 
in  the  second,  events  in  their  detail;  in  the  third,  events  in  their  connection;  in 
the  fourth,  events  in  relation  to  the  teaching  springing  from  them;  —  that  thus 
(c),  in  the  first  we  more  often  meet  with  the  notice  of  impressions ;  in  the  second, 
of  facts;  in  the  third,  of  motives;  in  the  fourth,  of  words  spokeu;  —  and  that, 
lastly  (d),  the  record  of  the  first  is  mainly  collective  and  often  antithetical;  of 
the  second,  graphic  and  circumstantial;  of  the  third,  didactic  and  reflective; 
of  the  fourth,  selective  and  supplemental.  We  may  (3),  conclude  by  saying  that 
in  respect  of  the  Portraiture  of  our  Lord,  the  first  Gospel  presents  Him  to  us 
mainly  as  the  Messiah;  the  second,  mainly  as  the  God-man;  the  third,  as  the 


Lect.  I.      CHARACTERISTICS   OF   THE   FOUR   GOSPELS.  47 

And  now  I  must  close  these  meditations.  Fain  would 
I  dwell  on  some  more  practical  applications,  but  the  re- 
membrance that  these  are  lectures  rather  than 

.  .      _  Conclusion. 

sermons,  and  that  the  time  is  far  spent,  warns 
me  to  say  no  more.  Yet  I  cannot  part  from  you,  my 
younger  brethren,  without  simply  yet  lovingly  urging  you 
ere  we  again  meet  in  this  church  to  spend  a  brief  hour  in 
reviving  your  remembrance  of  the  events  in  our  Re- 
deemer's history  which  conclude  with  the  return  of  the 
Holy  family  to  Nazareth,  and  precede  the  isolated  notice 
of  our  Lord's  visit  to  the  Temple  when  twelve  years  old ; 
for  thus  far  my  next  lecture  will  extend.  I  venture  to 
suggest  this,  for  I  feel  that  you  will  thus  be  enabled  to 
enter  with  a  fresher  interest  into  the  meditations  into 
which,  with  the  help  of  Almighty  God,  I  hope  to  lead  you 
next  Sunday  afternoon.  Yet  withal  remember,  I  beseech 
you,  that  this  is  no  mere  investigation  of  chronological 
difficulties,  no  dry  matter  of  contested  annals,  but  involves 
an  effort  to  see  and  /eel  with  more  freshness  and  reality 
the  significance  of  the  recorded  events  in  the  earthly  life  of 
the  Eternal  Son.1  Remember  that  it  implies  a  humble 
endeavor,  by  the  grace  of  the  inworking  Spirit,  to  gain  a 
more  vital  and  personal  interest  in  the  inspired  history  of 
Him  who  stooped  to  wear  the  garments  of  our  mortality, 
who  submitted  for  our  sakes  to  all  the  conditioning  cir- 
cumstances of  earthly  life,  was  touched  with  a  sense  of 
our  infirmities,  yea,  as  an  inspired  writer  has  told  us,  was 
pleased  to  learn  obedience  "by  the  things 
that  lie  suffered,"  though  himself  the  King 
of  kincrs  and  Lord  of  lords,  God  blessed  for  ever;  Amen. 


Redeemer;  the  fourth,  as  the  only -begotten  Son  of  God.  For  illustrations  of 
this  summary  the  reader  may  be  referred  to  the  Four  Witnesses  of  Da  Costa,  to 
Davidson,  Introduction  to  the  X.  T.  Vol.  i.;  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  I.  7.  2,  Vol.  i. 
p.  234—281;  Ebrard,  Kritilc  der  F.vang.  Ueschichte,  $  10—39. 

1  For  some  excellent  remarks  on  the  unity  of  the  Gospel  history  on  the  one 
hand,  and  its  fourfold  yet  organically  connected  revelation  of  our  Redeemer's 
life  and  works  on  the  other,  see  especially  the  eloquent  and  thoughtful  work  of 
Dr.  Lange,  already  several  times  referred  to,  Das  Leben  Jesu,  vn.  1,  2,  Book  i. 
p.  230  sq.—  a  work  which  we  sincerely  hope  may  ere  long  meet  with  a  com- 
petent translator. 


48  INTRODUCTORY   CONSIDERATIONS.  Lect.  I. 

Such  a  work,  if  regarded  under  such  aspects,  and  with 
such  remembrances,  both  is  and  must  be  blessed.  Such 
contemplations,  if  engaged  in  with  a  humble  and  loving 
spirit,  will  add  a  strength  to  your  faith,  which,  it  may  be,  the 
storm  and  stress  of  coming  life  will  never  be  able  success- 
fully to  weaken,  and  against  which  those  doubts  and  diffi- 
culties which  at  times  try  the  hearts  of  the  young  and 
inexperienced  will  be  found  both  powerless  and  unpre- 
vailing. 

O,  may  the    grace   of    our    Redeemer  be   with   you; 

may  He  quicken  your  young  hearts ;  may  He  show  unto 

you   His  glorious  beauty ;  may  His  image  grow  in  your 

souls ;  and  both  in  you  and  in  us  all  may  His  life-giving 

spirit  enlighten  the  eyes  of  our  understand- 

Eph.  i".  IS.  .  °  J 

ing,  and  fill  us,  heart  and  soul  and    spirit, 
with  all  the  fulness  of  God. 


LECTURE  II. 

THE   BIRTH  AND  INFANCY  OF  OUR  LORD. 


AND  THE  CHILD  GREW,   ASD    WAXED  8TKONQ    IN    SriKIT,   FILLED  WITH  WIS- 
DOM :    AND    THE  GKACK  OF  OOD  WAS    UPON  HIM.  —  St.  Luke  ii.  40. 


The  text  -which  I  have  just  read,  brethren,  forms  the 
concluding  verse  of  that  portion  of  the  Evan- 

_  ,  General  aspects 

gelical  history  to  which,  with  God's  assisting  of  the  present  un- 
grace,  I  purpose  directing  your  attention  this 
afternoon.  We  may  now  be  said  to  have  fairly  entered 
upon  the  solemn  subject  which  I  propose  treating  in  these 
lectures  ;  and  we  shall  do  well  at  once  to  address  ourselves 
to  its  discussion.  And  that,  too,  without  any  further  pre- 
liminary matter,  as  I  trust  that  my  remarks  last  Sunday 
will  have  so  far  prepared  us  for  the  sound  and  reverential 
use  of  the  four  sources  of  our  Redeemer's  history,  that  we 
need  no  longer  delay  in  applying  the  principles  which 
were  there  alluded  to. 

I  will  pause  only  so  far,  to  gather  up  the  results  of  our 
foregoing  meditations,  as  to  remind  you  that,  if  our  obser- 
vations  on  the  general  character  and  relations  of  the  four 
inspired  records  were  in  any  degree  just  and  reasonable,  it 
would  certainly  seem  clear  that  our  present  endeavor  to 
set  forth  a  continuous  and  connected  life  of  our  Master 
must  involve  a  constant  recognition  of  two  seemingly  op- 
posite modes  of  proceeding.  On  the  one  hand,  we  must 
regard  the  four  holy  histories  as  to  a  great  degree  inde- 
pendent in  their  aims,  objects,  and  general  construction, — 
as  marked  by  certain  fore-ordered  and  providentially- 
marked  characteristics  ;  and  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  we 
must  not  fail  to  observe  that  they  stand  in  such  relations 

5 


50  THE  BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

to  each  other  as  may  both  sanction  and  justify  our  combin- 
ing them  in  a  general  delineation  of  the  chief  features  of 
our  Redeemer's  earthly  life.  While  we  may  shrink  from 
mere  cold  and  sometimes  forced  harmonizing  on  this  side, 
we  must  not,  on  that,  so  exaggerate  seeming  differences1  as 
to  plead  exemption  from  the  edifying  task  of  comparing 
Scripture  with  Scripture,2  and  of  supplying  from  one 
inspired  writer  what  another  might  have  thought  it  meet 
to  leave  unnoticed  or  unexplained.  Nay,  more,  we  must 
not  shrink  from  noting  even  seeming  discrepancies,3  lest 
we  fail  to  learn,  by  a  more  attentive  consideration  of  them, 
how  they  commonly  arise  from  our  ignorance  of  some  un- 
recorded relations,  and  how  the  seeming  discord  is  due 
only  to  the  Selahs  and  silences  in  the  mingled  strains  of 
Evangelical  harmony.4 


1  This,  which  Augustine  (de  Consensu  Evang.  I.  7.  10)  well  calls  "  palmare 
vanitatis,"  has  been  far  too  much  the  tendency  of  modern  commentators  and 
essayists,  especially  in  Germany.  We  may  observe  this  not  merely  in  the  repul- 
sive productions  of  men  like  Strauss  and  his  followers,  but  even  in  the  com- 
mentaries of  more  sober  and  thoughtful  writers.  I  may  specify,  for  instance, 
the  otherwise  valuable  commentary  of  Dr.  Meyer.  Here  we  have  not  only  the 
fewest  possible  efforts  to  adjust  or  account  for  differences  in  the  order  of  events 
in  the  Gospel  history,  but  only  too  often  a  tendency  to  represent  them  greater 
than  they  really  are  found  to  be.  Compare,  for  example,  this  writer's  objection- 
able remarks  on  Luke  v.  1 — 11,  Kommentar,  p.  263.  The  results  of  the  modern 
destructive  school  are  stated  fairly  and  clearly  by  Ebrard,  Kritik  dcr  Evany. 
Gesch.  §  114—118,  p.  608.    See  especially  p.  641. 

2  Some  judicious  remarks  on  the  true  Christian  method  of  estimating,  com- 
paring, and  criticizing  the  inspired  records  of  the  four  Evangelists,  will  be 
found  in  the  introduction  to  Lange's  Leben  Jesu.  See  especially  Book  I.  4.  7, 
Vol.  i.  p.  141  sq. 

3  The  duty  of  the  critic  in  this  respect  is  well  stated  by  Dr.  Lange  in  the  work 
above  referred  to :  "  The  Evangelist,"  he  says,  "  may  certainly,  nay,  must  appear 
to  contradict  himself;  for  the  appearance  of  such  contradiction  is  the  mark  of 
life,  depth,  and  freshness.  Nature  appears  a  thousand  times  over  to  contradict 
herself.  If  a  critic  finds  a  difficulty  in  such  an  appearance  of  contradiction, 
and  demands  from  the  Gospels  the  precision  of  notaries,  he  clearly  enough 
evinces  his  own  incapability  of  forming  a  just  estimate  of  them."  Leben  Jesu, 
i.  4.  7,  Vol.  i.  p.  144.  See  also  some  brief  but  good  remarks  on  seeming  dis- 
crepancies in  the  introduction  to  Chrysostom's  Homilies  on  St.  Matt.  I.  p.  5 
(ed.  Bened.) 

4  "  But  if  in  recounting  the  wonders  (of  the  Gospel  history)  all  did  not  men- 
tion the  same  things,  but  one  mentioned  this  set  of  incidents  and  another  that, 
do  not  be  disturbed  thereby.  For  if  one  had  related  everything  the  rest  would 
have  been  superfluous;  or  if  all  had  written  new  and  peculiar  matter  ju  refer- 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  51 

But  let  us  delay  no  longer,  for  the  subject  before  us  is 
so  extended  that  it  will  fully  occupy  all  our 
time,  and  so  varied  that  it  will  require  some     ^2ement0fthe 
adjustment    to    adapt    it   to   the   prescribed 
limits  of  these  lectures. 

As  the  present  course  of  the  Ilulscan  Lectures  is  limited 
iu  its  duration  to  one  year,  and  consequently  will,  at  the 
very  utmost,  only  afford  me  eight  opportunities  of  address- 
ing you,1  it  will  perhaps  be  best  to  adopt  the  following 
divisions.  In  the  present  lecture  we  will  consider  the 
events  of  the  Lord's  infancy.  Next  Sunday  we  will  med- 
itate on  the  single  recorded  event  of  our  Lord's  boyhood, 
anil  that  portion  of  the  history  of  His  manhood  which 
commences  with  His  baptism  and  concludes  with  the  mir- 
acle at  the  pool  of  Bethesda, —  in  a  word,  what  maybe 
roughly  though  conveniently  termed  our  Lord's  early 
Judaan  ministry.  A  fourth  and  a  fifth  lecture  may  be 
devoted  to  the  ministry  in  Galilee  and  the  neighboring 
districts;  a  sixth  may  contain  a  brief  account  of  the 
Lord's  last  three  journeys  to  or  towards  Jerusalem;  a 
seventh  may  well  be  given  exclusively  to  the  events  of  the 
passover,  —  that  period  of  such  momentous  interest,  and 
so  replete  with  difficulties  of  combination  and  arrange- 
ment ;  —  and  a  concluding  lecture  may  embrace  the  history 
of  the  last  forty  days. 

In  the  present  portion,  if  we  leave  out  the  commence- 
ment of  St.  John's  Gospel  and  the  early  history  of  the 
Baptist,2   the   first    recorded   event   is   of  an  importance 


ence  to  one  another  there  would  not  have  appeared  the  present  evidence  of 
agreement."  —  Chrysostom,  lb.  p.  6.  See  further  some  judicious  remarks  in  the 
introduction  to  The  Four  Witnesses  of  Da  Costa,  p.  1  sq. 

1  Owing  to  recent  regulations,  this  number  of  Lectures  has  been  finally  reduced 
to  six.  The  last  two  Lectures  were  thus  not  preached,  but  are  added  both  for 
the  sake  of  still  maintaining  some  conformity  to  the  will  of  the  founder,  and 
also  for  the  sake  of  giving  a  necessary  completeness  to  the  subject. 

2  These  portions  of  the  inspired  narrative  are  not  commented  on.  The  former 
belongs  more  to  the  province  of  dogmatical  theology,  the  latter  to  the  general 
history  of  our  Lord's  times,  into  neither  of  which  our  present  limits  and  the 
restricted  nature  of  our  subject  will  now  permit  us  to  enter.    The  student  will 


52  THE   BIRTH   AND    INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

that  cannot  be  over-estimated,  —  that  single  event  in  the 

history  of  our  race  that  bridges  over  the  stu- 

JJJJT    pendous  chasm  between  God  and  man.    That 

Loni;  us  vujstery     fjrst  event  is  t]ie  miraculous  conception  of 

ana  sublimity.  I 

our  Redeemer.1  It  is  related  to  us  both  by 
the  first  and  third  Evangelists,2  and  by  the  latter  with 
such  an  accuracy  of  detail,  that  we  may  bless  God  for 
having  vouchsafed  to  us  a  record  which,  if  reverently  and 
attentively  considered,  will  be  found  to  suggest  an  answer 
to  every  question  that  might  present  itself  to  an  honest 
though  amazed  spirit.  Yea,  and  it  is  a  subject  for  amaze- 
ment.3 Dull  hearts  there  may  be  that  have  never  cared 
to  meditate  deeply  on  these  mysteries  of  our  salvation, 
and  to  which  the   wonder  and  even  perplexity  of  nobler 

find  an  elaborate  and,  in  most  respects,  satisfactory  article  on  the  Baptist,  in 
Winer,  JieahcUrterb.  Vol.  i.  p.  585—590;  and  some  good  comments  on  his  minis- 
try in  Greswell,  Dissert,  xix.  Vol.  ii.  p.  148  sq. 

1  Some  good  remarks  on  this  profound  subject  will  be  found  in  Xeander,  Life 
of  Christ,  p.  13  sq.  (Bolm).  The  student  will  there  find  an  able  exposure  of  the 
mythical  view,  as  it  is  called,  of  this  sublime  mystery,  and  brief  but  satisfactory 
answers  to  current  objections.  The  main  position  of  Jseander  is,  that  the  mirac- 
ulous conception  was  demanded  a  priori,  and  confirmed  a  posteriori.  As  regards 
any  explanation  of  the  special  circumstances  of  this  holy  miracle,  all  that  can  be 
said  has  been  said  by  Bp.  Pearson,  Creed,  Art.  in.  Vol.  i.  p.  203  (ed.  Burton).  See 
also  Andre wes,  Serm.  ix.  Vol.  i.  p.  135  sq.  (A.-C.  Libr.).  The  dignity  of  the  con- 
ception is  well  touched  upon  by  Hilary,  de  Trinitate,  Book  u.  p.  17  (Paris,  1C31). 

2  The  objection  founded  on  the  assumed  silence  of  St.  John  is  wholly  futile. 
If  our  view  of  St.  John's  Gospel  be  correct  (see  above,  p.  30),  it  may  be  fairly 
urged  that  a  formal  notice  of  an  event  which  had  been  so  fully  related  by  one 
Evangelist  and  so  distinctly  confirmed  by  another  would  have  seemed  out  of 
place  in  a  Gospel  so  constructed  as  that  of  St.  John.  What  we  might  have 
expected  we  meet  with,  —  the  fullest  and  most  unquestioned  statement  of  tin's 
divine  truth  (ch.  i.  14,  comp.  ver.  13),  nay  more,  reasoning  which  depends  upon 
it  (ch.  iii.  6),  but  no  historical  details.  See  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  17,  note 
(Bolm),  and  compare  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses,  p.  286.  The  similarly  assumed 
silence  of  St.  Paul  (Von  Ammon,  Gesch.  des  Lebens  Jesu,  I.  4,  Vol.  i.  p.  186)  is 
abundantly  confuted  by  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  2,  4,  Vol.  ii.  pp.  72,  73. 

3  Well  may  Augustine  say :  "Quid  mirabilius  virginis  partu!  concipit  et  virgo 
est;  parit  et  virgo  est.  Creatus  est  de  ea  quam  creavit:  attulit  ei  fecunditatcm, 
non  corrupit  ejus  integritatemV — Serm.  clxxxix.2,  Vol.  v.  p.  1605  (ed.  Migne). 
So,  too,  Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  in  a  fine  sermon  on  the  nativity:  Tlpoe\$u>!/  8e 
<r)ehs  /ueTa  t/)s  TTpoff\r)\p€ws  %v  f/c  5vo  twv  euavrioov,  aapKbs  Ktxl  Tli>ev/j.cnos- 
wv  to  fxei>  idewcre,  vb  Se  edeaide.  *fl  rf/s  Katvys  pl^eics,  &  ttjs  irapaSo^ov 
Kpaaecos,  6  2>v  ylverat,  Kai  6  o.ktkttos  KriQerm,  Ktxl  6  ax<*>pVT0S  xwP(*Tat  5ia 
Liea-qs  tyuxvs  voepas  /x€(TiTtvov<rT]s  ^(ottjti  ko.\  aapKbs  iraxvT7\Ti.  —  Orat. 
xxxvin.  p.  C20  (ed.  Morell). 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  53 

spirits  may  have  seemed  unreasonable  or  inexplicable. 
Such  there  may  be ;  but  who  of  higher  strain,  as  he  sees 
and  feels  the  infirmities  with  which  he  is  encompassed,  the 
weakness  and  frailty  of  that  flesh  with  which  he  is  clothed,1 
the  sinfulness  that  seems  wound  round  every  fibre,  and 
knit  up  with  every  joint  of  his  perishing  body,  —  who  has 
truly  felt  all  this,  and  not  found  himself  at  times  over- 
whelmed with  the  contemplation  of  the  mystery  of  Em- 
manuel,2—  the  everlasting  God  manifested  in,  yea  taber- 
nacling in,  this  very  mortal  flesh  ?  Wild  heathenism,  we 
say,  may  have  dreamed  such  dreams.  The  pagan  of  the 
AVest  may  have  vaunted  of  his  deified  mortality  and  his 
brother  men  ascending  to  the  gods;  the  pagan  of  the  East 
may  have  fabled  of  his  encarnalized  divinities,  and  of  his 
gods  descending  to  men  ; 8  but  this  mystery  of  mysteries, 
that  the  Eternal  Son  of  the  Eternal  Father,  He  whose 
out-goings  had  been  from  everlasting,  whose  hands  had 
laid  the  bases  of  the  hills  and  spread  out  the  floods,  that 
lie  should  become  incarnate,  should  take  upon  Him  our 
nature  and  our  infirmities,  —  can  it  be?  Can  such  a 
thought  have  found  an  expression  in  prophecy  ? 4     Can  it 

1  "  What  say  you  to  flesh?  is  it  meet  God  be  manifested  therein?  'Without 
controversy  '  it  is  not.  Why,  what  is  flesh?  it  is  no  mystery  to  tell  what  it  is;  it 
is  duet,  saith  the  patriarch  Abraham.  It  is  grass,  saith  the  prophet  Esay  ;  fosnum, 
'grass  cut  down,  and  withering.'  It  is  '  corruption,' not  corruptible,  but  even 
corruption  itself,  saith  the  Apostle  Paul.  .  .  .  We  cannot  choose  but  hold  this 
mystery  for  great,  and  say  with  Augustine,  Deus;  quid  gloriosius?  Caro ;  quid 
vilius?  I )e us  in  came ;  quid  mirabiiius  ?  " — Andrewes,  Serm.  in.  Vol.  i.  p.  37 
(A.-C.  Libr.). 

2  "O,  the  height  and  depth  of  this  super-celestial  mystery! :'  says  the  eloquent 
Bishop  Hall,  "  that  the  infinite  Deity  and  finite  flesh  should  meet  in  one  subject, 
yet  so  as  the  humanity  should  not  be  absorbed  of  the  Godhead,  nor  the  Godhead 
contracted  by  the  humanity,  but  both  inseparably  united;  that  the  Godhead  is 
not  humanized,  the  humanity  not  deified,  both  are  indivisibly  conjoined;  con- 
joined so  as  without  confusion  distinguished."—  Great  Mystery  of  Godliness,  §  2, 
Vol.  viii.  p.  332  (Oxf.  1837).  Chrysostom  has  expressed  very  similar  sentiments 
and  with  equal  eloquence.    See  Horn,  in  Matt.  n.  p.  21  (ed.  Bened.). 

3  This  thought  is  well  expressed  and  expanded  by  Dr.  Dorner  in  his  valuable 
work  on  the  Person  qf  Christ,  Vol.  i.  p.  4  sq.  (ed.  2,  1845). 

4  The  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  relating  to  the  miraculous  conception, 
so  often  and  so  recklessly  explained  away  or  denied,  will  be  found  calmly  and 
critically,  though  not  in  all  respects  satisfactorily,  discussed  by  Hofmann,  Svhrift- 
I"  u;  is.  M.  1.  5.  3,  Vol.  ii.  p.  54—09. 

5* 


54  THE   BIRTH  AND    INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

have  become  realized  in  history  ?  Say,  —  can  it  be  ?  Can 
the  world  produce  a  narrative  that  can  make  such  a  con- 
ception imaginable?  Is  there  a  record  that  can  make  such 
an  event  seem  credible,  seem  possible,  we  will  not  say  to 
a  doubting,  but  even  to  a  receptive  and  to  a  trustful  spirit  ? 
Yea,  verily,  blessed  be  God,  we  have  that  narrative,  and 
on  that  narrative,  not  only  in  its  general  outlines,  but  its 
most  special  details,  we  may  rely  with  a  confidence  which 
every  meditative  reading  will  be  found  to  enhance  and  to 
corroborate. 

Let  us  pause  a  moment  to  consider  a  few  of  the  more 

striking  portions  of  the  narrative,  especially 

nie  narrative  of     from  the  point  of  view  in  which  we  are  for 

the  conception  con-  *■ 

sidered generally.  the  moment  regarding  it, —  that  of  supplying 
the  fullest  conviction  to  every  honest  but 
anxious,  every  longing  but  inquiring,  heart.  Does  the 
idealizing  spirit  that  views  the  transcendent  event  in  all 
the  circumstances  of  its  widest  universality,  —  that  seems 
to  recognize  the  mysterious  adaptations  of  earthly  domin- 
ion,1 to  read  the  tokens  of  the  fulness  of  the  times,  and 
to  discern  the  longings  pervading,  not  only  the  chosen 

l  The  state  of  the  world  at  the  epoch  when  our  Lord  appeared  was  exactly  that 
which,  according  to  our  mere  human  conceptions,  might  seem  most  fitted  for  the 
reception  of  Christianity.  Judaism,  on  the  one  hand,  had  lost  all  those  external 
glories  and  prerogatives  which,  at  an  earlier  period,  would  have  prevented  any 
recognition  of  the  Messiah,  save  as  a  national  ruler  and  king.  There  would  have 
been  no  Israel  of  God  with  chastened  hearts  and  more  spiritualized  expectancies 
waiting,  as  we  know  they  now  were,  for  a  truer  redemption  of  Israel.  Heathen- 
ism, on  the  other  hand,  had  now  gained  by  its  contact  with  Judaism  truer  con- 
ceptions of  the  Unity  of  God;  and  many  a  proselyte  of  the  gate  was  there  who, 
like  the  centurion  of  Capernaum  (Luke  vii.  5),  loved  well  the  nation  that  had 
taught  him  to  kneel  to  the  one  God,  and  could  bear  to  receive  from  that  despised 
people  a  knowledge  of  his  own  and  the  world's  salvation.  Compare  Jost,  Ges- 
chichte  des  Judenthums,  in.  1,  4,  Vol.  i.  p.  330,  and  Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity, 
ch.  i.  Vol.  i.  p.  21  sq.  When  we  add  to  this  the  remembrance  of  the  recent  con- 
solidation of  the  power  of  Rome  (see  esp.  Merivale,  Hist,  of  Romans,  ch.  xxxix. 
Vol.  iv.  p.  383  sq.),  and  recognize  a  political  centralization  which  could  not  but 
aid,  however  unwittingly  and  unwillingly,  the  pervasive  influences  of  the  new 
faith,  we  may  well  feel  that  the  very  appearance  of  Christianity,  at  the  time  when 
it  did  appear,  is  in  itself  an  indirect  evidence  of  its  divine  nature  and  truth.  See 
some  good  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Lange,  Leben  Jem,  n.  1. 1,  p.  15  sq.  ;  and 
for  a  fairly  candid  statement  of  the  relations  of  Judaism  to  Christianity,  the 
learued  work  of  Jost,  Oeschichte  des  Judenthums,  in.  3  11,  Vol.  i.  p.  394  rq. 


Lect.  n. 


OF    OUR   LORD.  55 


people,1  but  the  whole  wide  realms  of  the  Eastern  world,2 — 
does  such  a  spirit,  meditating  thus  loftily  and  perchance 
blamelessly  upon   the  mighty  coincidences  of  time    and 
place  and  history,  seek  in  vain  for  some  features  in  the 
record   of  the  incarnation   of  the   Son  of  God  that  shall 
respond    to    such    feelings?      Does   not   the 
direct   message   from    Jehovah,  the  angelic         znteta. 
ministration,  the  operative  influence  of  the         zukei.sa. 
Eternal  Spirit,  all  tend  to  work  a  conviction         Luke u  as. 
that  to  the  receptive  heart  becomes  of  inex- 
pressible strength?3     Or  again,  to  the  more  humble  and 
meek  spirit,  that  seeks  only  by  the  holy  leadings  of  simple 
narrative  to  gain  for  itself  a  saving  knowledge  of  the  his- 
tory of  its  own  salvation,  is  there  not  here  disclosed,  in 
the  many  notices  of  the  purely  human  and  outward  rela- 
tions of  those  whom  the  opening  of  the  Gospel  brings  be- 
fore us,  those  artless  traits  of  historic  truth   that  on  some 
minds  work  such  a  fulness   of  conviction  ?     Yes,  let   us 
take  the  very  objections  of  adversaries  or  sceptics,  and  see 
in  this  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  the  more  direct  agen- 
cies of  the  spiritual  world,  and  in  the  short  notice  of  St. 


1  The  gradual  development  of  this  feeling:,  and  the  circumstances  which 
helped  to  promote  it,  are  well  noticed  by  Ewald,  Geschichte  Christus\  pp. 
65—96. 

2  It  has  been  recently  considered  doubtful  whether  the  well-known  passages 
from  Tacitus  (Hist.  v.  13)  and  Suetonius  (  J",  spas.  4)  relating  to  the  feeling  that 
pervaded  the  whole  Eastern  world,  and  the  attention  that  was  directed  to 
Judaea,  may  not  have  been  imitated  from  Josephus  (2teZZ.Jud.vix.  5,4).  See 
Neander,  Life  <>f  Christ,  p.  28,  note  (Bonn),  and  compare  Whist  on,  Dissert,  m., 
appended  to  his  translation  of  Josephus,  esp.  Vol.  iii.  p.  G12  (Oxford,  1839).  Such 
an  imitation  does  not  seem  clearly  made  out ;  still,  even  if  in  part  we  concede  it, 
we  have  only  thus  far  weakened  the  testimony  from  without  as  (o  consider  it  an 
acceptance  Of  B  statement  made  from  within,  because  that  statement  was  felt  to 
be  correct. 

3  "Our  own  idea  of  Christ  compels  us  to  admit  that  two  factors,  the  one  natu- 
ral, the  other  supernatural,  were  coefficient  in  His  entrance  into  human  life) 
and  this,  too,  although  we  may  be  unable,  d  priori,  to  state  how  that  entrance 
was  accomplished.  But  at  this  point  the  historical  accounts  come  to  our  aid,  by 
testify  in"  thai  what  our  theory  of  the  ease  requires,  did  in  fact  occur."  —  Nean- 
der, i.ij,  qf  Christ,  p.  18  (Bohn),  —  a  loose,  but  substantially  correct  represt  nta- 
l !•  n i  of  the  original  [Leben  Jesu  Christi,j>.  l">).  Compare  I'>p.  Taylor,  L\fi  <f 
Christ,  i  ad  sect.  i.  4,  Vol.  i.  p.  28  (Loud.  is:;;). 


56  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

Matthew's  Gospel  their  more  mediate  workings,1 —  let  us 
accept  the  statement,  and  see  in  it  only  one  more  proof,  if 
proof  be  needed,  of  the  diverse  forms  in  which  Evangeli- 
cal Truth  is  presented  to  the  receptive  mind,  let  us  recog- 
nize in  it  only  one  more  example  of  the  varied  aspects  of 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God. 

Let   us  now  substantiate   the  foregoing   remarks  by  a 
brief  notice  of  the   details  of  the   inspired 

The  narrative  of  L 

the  Conception  con-       histOl'V. 
sideredinitsdetatia.  .     .  , 

What  a  vivid  truth,  speaking  humanly, 
there  is  in  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke !  With  what  a  mar- 
vellous aptitude  to  human  infirmity  do  things,  divine  and 
human,  mingle  with  each  other  in  ever  illustrative  and  ever 
confirmatory  combinations.  With  what  striking  persua- 
siveness do  mysteries  seemingly  beyond  the  grasp  of 
thought  blend  lovingly  with  the  simplest  elements,  and 
become  realizable  by  the  teachings  of  the  homely  relations 
of  humble  and  sequestered  life.  With  what  a  noble  yet 
circumstantial  simplicity  —  a  simplicity  that  in  the  lan- 
guage, no  less  than  in  the  facts  related,  bewrays  the  record 
of  her  who  saw  and  believed2 — -is  the  opening  story  told 


1  See,  for  example,  Von  Ammon,  Gesch.  des  Lebens  Jesu,  I.  5,  Vol.  i.  p.  191. 
We  do  not  in  these  lectures  notice,  nor  do  we  consider  it  either  useful  or  edify- 
ing to  notice,  the  repulsive  opinions  of  writers  like  Strauss  (Leben  Jesu),  Weisse 
(die  Evang.  Geschichte),  or  Gfrorer  (Geschichte  des  Urchristenthum):  their  gen- 
eral tendencies  are  so  simply  destructive,  their  unhappy  criticisms  so  almost 
judicially  infatuated,  and  their  progressions  in  douht  and  denials  (see  Ebrard, 
Kritik  der  Ev.  Gesch.  §  6,  7)  such  melancholy  instances  of  a  very  /ue&o5eia 
ir\av7]s  (Eph.  iv.  14),  that  we  may  well  leave  them  to  themselves,  and  to  their 
own  mutual  confutations.  Writers  of  the  character  of  the  one  above  alluded 
to  may,  however,  sometimes  be  profitably  referred  to,  as  evincing,  as  Von 
Amnion  especially  does  in  respect  of  this  narrative  (see  pp.  190,  191),  what  an 
amount  of  unhappy  effort  it  takes  to  resist  the  impression  of  its  vital  truth 
which  the  evangelical  history  makes  upon  doubting  minds  that  will  consent  to 
be  reasonable  and  candid. 

2  See  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  2.  6,  Vol.  ii.  p.  93.  We  can,  perhaps,  hardly  go  so 
far  with  this  able  writer  as  positively  to  find  in  the  recital  of  the  events  a  diction 
that  belongs  rather  to  a  woman  than  to  a  man;  but  when  we  mark  the  speci- 
alities of  the  narrative,  the  preservation  of  the  exact  expressions  of  the  sacred 
canticles,  and,  above  all,  the  tone  of  artless  reality  which  pervades  the  whole, 
we  seem  perfectly  justified  in  believing  that  we  have  here,  partly  perhaps  in 
substance,  partly  in  precise  terms,  a  record  that  came  to  St.  Luke,  mediately  oi 


Lect.  ir.  OF   OUR   LORD.  57 

of  man's  redemption !  The  angel  Gabriel,  he  who  stood 
among  the  highest  of  the  angelic  hierarchy,  and  whose 
ministrations,  if  it  be  not  too  bold  a  thing  to  affirm,  appear 
to  have  been  specially  Messianic,  just  as  those  of  Raphael 
might  have  pertained  to  individual  need,  and  those  of 
Michael  to  judicial  power,1 — that  blessed  Spirit,  who  a  few 
months  before  had  been  sent  to  announce  the  future  birth 
of  the  forerunner,  is  now  sent  from  God  to  a 
rude  and  lone  village  in  the  hills  of  Galilee, 
—  Nazareth  the  disestecmed,2  and  to  a  betrothed  virgin," 
whose  name  was  Mary.  Of  the  early  history  of  that 
highly  favored  one  Ave  know  nothing.  Yet,  without  bor- 
rowing one  thought  from  the  legendary  notices  of  apocry- 
phal narrative,4  it  does  not  seem  a  baseless  fancy  to  recog- 
nize in  her  one  of  those  pure  spirits  that  in  seclusion  and 
loneliness  were  looking  and  longing  for  the  theocratic  King, 

immediately,  from  the  lips  of  the  Virgin  herself,  —  her  Son's  first  evangelist. 
And  with  such  a  belief  the  peculiarities  of  the  diction  seem  fully  to  coincide. 
While  throughout  we  can  trace  the  hand  of  St.  Luke  (sec  esp.  Gersdorf,  Beitr'dge, 
p.  160  Bq.),  we  can  also  see  in  the  transition  from  the  studied  dedication  to  the 
simple  structure  of  the  ancient  Scriptures  just  that  change  which  a  faithful 
incorporation  of  the  recital  of  another  would  be  certain  to  introduce.  Compare 
Mill,  on  Pantheistic  Principles,  Part  n.  p.  23  sq.  .  . 

l  This  remark  (valeat  quantum)  is  due  to  Lange  {Leben  Jesu,  II.  2.  2,  Vol.  ii.  r 
p.  4<i),  whose  whole  chapter  on  the  subject  of  angelic  ministrations  deserves 
perusal.  For  further  references  on  the  nature  of  angels,  see  notes  on  Eph.  i.  'Jl ; 
and  for  a  most  able  confutation  of  the  arguments  against  this  portion  of  the 
sacred  narrative,  founded  on  angelic  appearances,  Mill,  Obss.  on  Pantheistic 
PrincipU  s,  Part  n.  4,  p.  52  sq. 

!  Sec  Stanley,  Palestine,  chap.  x.  1.  p.  361  (ed.  2),  and  compare  John  i.  46,  and 
the  notes  of  Meyer  in  loc.  The  savage  act  recorded  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  iv.  29)  is  a 
good  commentary  on  the  meaning  of  Natbanael's question.  For  an  interesting 
description  of  Nazareth,  especially  considered  with  reference  to  the  Gospel  his- 
tory, see  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  333  sq.  (ed.  2). 

3  "So  it  was  that  the  Virgin  was  betrothed,  lest  honorable  marriage  might  bo 
disreputed,  and  seem  inglorious,  by  a  positive  rejection  from  any  participation 
in  the  honor.7'— Taylor,  Idfe  of  Christ,  1.  ad  sect.  r.  6,  Vol.  i.  p.  20  (Lond.  1886). 
Other,  and  some  of  them  singular,  reasons  are  assigned  by  the  older  writers. 
Bee  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  Part  i.  p.  116.  The  use  of  the  word  jj-envva-revixf^v 
is  investigated  \vith  much  learning  by  Bynseus,  de  NataliJes.  Chr.  x.  p.  -_!^  sq. 

4  The  history  of  the  Virgin  is  told  at  great  length  in  the  Protevangelium  of 
James,  and  in  the  so-called  Gospels  de  Ortu  (Pseudo-Matt.)  and  de  Nativitate 
Maria.  See  Tischendorf,  Evang  Apocrypha  (Lips.  1858);  and  for  a  connected 
histoid  formed  out  of  these  apooryphal  writings,  the  laborious  work  ofHof- 
inann  (K),  das  Li  ben  Jesu  nach  den  Apocryphen  (Leipz.  1851). 


58  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

and  that,  deeply  imbued,  as  we  see  the  Virgin  must  have 

been,  both  with  the  letter  and  with  the  spirit  of  the  Old 

Testament,  were  awaiting  the  evolution  of 

LiJce  i.  4C— 55.  1        1  •     i  p      n  ■  i  « 

the  highest  of  all  its  transcendent  prophecies. 
Rapt  as  such  a  one  might  well  have  been  in  devotion,  or  in 
Messianic  meditation,1  she  sees  before  her,  at  no  legendary 
spring-side,2   but,   as   the   words  of  the   Evangelist  seem 

rather  to  imply,  in  her  own   humble  abode, 

Luke  i.  28.  ...... 

the  clivinely-sent  messenger,  and  hears  a  salu- 
tation which,  expressed   in    the   terms   in   which   it  was 
expressed,  "  Hail,  highly  favored  one !    the 
Lord  is  with  thee,"  and  coming  as  it  did  from 
an  angel's  lips,  must  well  have  troubled  that  meek  spirit 
and  cast  it  into  awe  and  perplexity.3 

What   persuasive  truth  there  is   in  the  nature  of   the 

terms  in  which    the   announcement   is    con- 

sey-evirtentmith     veyed.     To  that  highly  favored  one,  that  per- 

of  the  narrative.  '  °       "  l 

chance  had  long  communed  in  stillness  on 
the  prophecies  of  the  Messianic  kingdom,  to  her  is  Jesus 
the  Son  of  the  Highest  portrayed  in  that  form,  which,  par- 
tially Israelitic  in  general  outline,  yet  Christian  in  essence,4 

1  Bp.  Taylor  censures  any  speculation  of  this  kind;  but  it  seems,  to  say  the 
least,  harmless,  and  not  inconsistent  with  the  meditative  spirit  which  reveals 
itself  in  the  Virgin's  inspired  canticle.  Bengel  hints  at  the  time  as  evening, 
comparing  Dan.  ix.  21. 

2  Compare  Proterang.  cap.  11,  Hist,  de  JS'at.  Marice,  cap.  9,  and  compare  Ilof- 
mann.  Leben  Jesu,  p.  74.  The  expressions  of  inspired  narrative  (vcr.  28)  seem 
in  this  particular  to  justify  the  statement  made  in  Suidas  s.  v.  'Irjtrovs,  where  the 
Virgin  is  related  as  specifying,  —  eltreKSt&i/  ep  <j>  ij/xriv  oiKrifiari.  The  spring  in 
question  is  alluded  to  and  briefly. described  by  Stanley,  Palestine,  p.  362  (ed.  2). 

3  The  addition  of  the  participle  (Soucrain  the  received  text,  though  not  with- 
out great  external  support  (see  Tischendorf  in  loc. ),  must  still  be  considered  as 
somewhat  doubtful.  Even  if  retained,  we  may  perhaps  more  naturally  refer  the 
troubled  feelings  of  the  Virgin  simply  to  the  terms  in  which  the  salutation  was 
couched:  observe  the  specific  eirJ  rtp  \6ya>,  and  the  concluding  clause,  K(U 
SieAo"yi(,'eTO  iroTcnrbs  ejTj  aairaafxb $  outos. 

•J  We  seem  to  recognize  this  distinction  in  the  expressions  of  vcr.  S3. — If,  on 
the  one  hand,  the  heavenly  messenger  declares,  in  continuation  of  the  image  :it 
the  concluding  part  of  the  former  verse,  that  the  Eternal  Son  "  shall  reign  over 
llie  house  of  Jacob  for  ever;"  he,  on  the  other  hand,  seems  to  imply,  by  the  very 
seeming  repetition,  "And  of  His  kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end,"  a  reference  to 
a  still  more  universal  dominion.  Comp.  Dan.  vii.  14,  and  see  Bynieus,  dc  ifatali 
Jcs.  Chr.  xxxvi.  p.  117  sq. 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  59 

must  have  begun  to  work  in  her  the  most  lively  conviction. 
Yet  how  characteristic  is  the  question,  "How       Iafe<  M 
shall  this  be  ?  "  the  question  not  of  outwardly       Luke ,-.  18. 
expressed  doubt,  like  that  of  Zacharias,  or  of       aea.xnu.-a. 
an  inwardly  felt  sense  of  impossibility,  like       ccn.xvm.12. 
that  of  Abraham  and  Sarah  in  the  old  and  typical  past, 
but  of  a  childlike  innocence,  that  sought  to  realize  to  itself, 
in  the  very  face  of  seeming  impossibilities,  the  full  assurance 
of  its  own  blessedness.     No,  there  was  no  lack  of  real  faith 
in  that  question.1     It  was  a  question  to  which  the  heavenly 
messenger  was  permitted  to  return  a  most  explicit  answer, 
and  to  confirm  by  a  most  notable  example,  even  that  of  her 
kinswoman  Elisabeth,  that  with  God  no  word 
was  impossible,2 — no  promise  that  was  not 
to  receive  its  completest  and  most  literal  fulfilment. 

"With  these  words  of  the  angel  all  seems  to  have  become 
clear  to  her  in  regard  of  the  wonder-working  power  of 
God ;  much,  too,  must  have  already  seemed  clear  to  her  on 
the  side  of  man.  With  the  rapid  fore-glance  of  thought, 
she  must  have  seen  in  the  clouded  future,  scorn,  dereliction, 
the  pointed  finger  of  a  mocking  and  uncharitable  world, 
calumny,  shame,  death.     But  what  was  a  world's  scorn,  or 

1  The  utmost  that  can  be  said  is  that  the  Virgin  felt  the  seeming  impossibility, 
and  that  in  avowing  the  feeling  she  sought  for  that  further  assurance  which  she 
also  felt  would  not  be  withheld,  and  would  at  once  allay  her  doubts.  Even  the 
following  excellent  remarks  of  Jackson  attribute  to  the  Virgin  somewhat  more 
mistrust  than  the  words  and  the  case  seem  to  imply  :  '■  It  is  far  from  my  dispo- 
sition at  any  time,  or  my  purpose  at  this,  to  urge  further  to  aggravate  the 
infirmity  of  a  vessel  bo  sanctified,  elect,  and  precious:  and  I  am  persuaded  tho 
Evangelist  did  not  so  much  intend  to  disparage  hers,  as  to  confirm  our  belief, 
by  relating  her  doubtful  question,  and  the  angel's  reply;  the  one  being  but 
Sarah's  mistrust,  refined  with  maidenly  modesty,  the  other  Sarah's  check,  miti- 
gated and  qualified  by  the  angel.-'—  Creed,  Book  vn.  1. 12,  Vol.  vi.  p.  209  (Oxf. 
1844).  'flic  earlier  commentators,  though  perhaps  they  Slightly  overprcss  the 
tc«.'S  in  the  Virgin's  question  (eVi^TjToi/fl'a  rbu  rp6irov  rou  irpdy/j.aTos,  Theopli.), 
have  in  mosl  cases  rightly  appreciated  the  true  state  of  feeling  which  prompted 
the  question.    Comp.  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  11. 2, 8,  Vol.  ii  p.  66 

2  It  is  usual  to  consider  ^F/jua  in  thi8  text  as  coextensive  in  meaning  with  the 
Hebrew  ~^~.  and  as  implj  ing  "  thing,''  "  matter "  ("Wordsworth,  in  loc.).  This 
is  now  rightly  called  in  question  by  the  most  accurate  interpreters;  the  meaning 
i-  -imply  as  stated  by  Kntliy miiis,  —  ttuv  u  Ae'yet,  nuv  o  iwayyeAtTat.  See 
Meyer,  Komiih  nl .  B01  r  Lvk.,  p.  203. 


60  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

a  world's  persecution,  to  those  words  of  promise  ?     Faith 
sustains  that  possible  shrinking  from  more  than  mortal  trial, 
and  turns  it  into  meekest  resignation :  "  Behold  the  hand- 
maid of  the  Lord ;  be  it  unto  me  according  to  thy  word." 
From  that  hour  the  blessed  Virgin  seems  ever  to  appear 
before  us  in  that  character,  which  the  notices  of  the  Gos- 
pels so  consistently  adumbrate,1  meek  and  pensive,  medita- 
tive and  resigned,  blessed  with  joys  no  tongue  can  tell,  and 
yet,  even  in  the  first  hours  of  her  blessedness,  beginning  to 
feel  one  edge  of  the  sword  that  was  to  pierce 
through  her  loving  and  submissive  heart. 
The  last  words  of  the  miraculous  message  seem  to  pre- 
pare us  for  the  next  event  recorded  by  the 
rtoZToEiuab^h.     Evangelist,  —  the  hasty  journey  of  the  Vir- 
gin to  her  aged  relative  Elisabeth,2  in  the  hill- 
country  of  Judgea:  "and  Mary  arose  and  went  into  the 
hill-country,  with  haste,  unto  a  city  of  Juda." 
But  why  this  haste?     Why  this  lengthened, 
and/as  far  as  we  can  infer  from  national  custom,^/inusual 
journey  in  the  case  of  a  young  and  secluded  maiden?    Are 
we  to  believe,  with  a  recent  and  eloquent  writer  of  a  life  of 

1  The  character  of  the  blessed  Virgin,  as  far  as  it  can  be  inferred  from  the 
Scriptures,  has  been  touched  upon  by  Nicmeyer,  Character,  Vol.  i.  p.  54  sq. 
Some  thoughtful  notices,  as  derived  from  St.  John's  Gospel,  will  be  found  in 
Luthardt,  das  Johann.  Evang.  Vol.  i.  p.  114  sq. 

2  It  seems  impossible  to  state  confidently  the  nature  of  this  relationship.  It 
has  been  thought  possible  that  the  Virgin  may  have  been  of  the  tribe  of  Levi, 
and  thus  connected  with  Elisabeth,  who  we  know  was  of  that  tribe;  so  the 
apocryphal  document  called  the  Testamentum  xii.  Patrum,  $  2,  7,  and  Faustus 
Manichanis,  as  referred  to  by  Augustine,  contra  Faust.  Manich.  xxiii.  9,  Vol. 
viii.  p.  471  (ed.  Migne).  The  more  probable  opinion  is,  that  the  Virgin  was  of 
the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  that  the  relationship  with  Elisabeth  arose  from  some 
intermarriage.  Such  intermarriages  between  members  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  and 
members  of  other  tribes  can  be  shown  to  have  occurred  in  earlier  periods  of 
sacred  history  (comp.  2  Chron.  xxii.  11);  and  in  these  later  periods  might  have 
been  far  from  uncommon.  See  Bynasus,  de  Natali  Chr.  I.  1.  47,  p.  141;  and 
comp.  Mishna,  Tract,  "Kiddushin,"  iv.  1  sq.  Vol.  iii.  p.  878  sq.  (ed.  Surenhus.). 

3  Passages  have  been  cited  from  Philo,  de  Legg.  Spec.  ill.  31,  Vol.  i.  p  327  (ed. 
Mangey),  and  Talm.  Hleros.  Tract,  "Chetuboth,"  vn.  6,  which  would  seem  to 
imply  that  such  journeys  in  the  case  of  virgins  were  contrary  to  general  custom. 
"The  journey, "'  says  Lange,  "was  not  quite  in  accordance  with  Old-Testament 
decorum;  the  deep  realities  of  the  cross,  however,  give  a  freedom  in  the  spirit  of 
the  New."  —  Leben  Jesu,  Vol.  ii  p.  85. 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR  LORD.  61 

our  Lord,  that  it  was  in  consequence  of  a  communication 
on  the  part  of  the  Virgin,  and  a  subsequent  rejection  on  the 
part  of  Joseph?1  Are  we  to  do  such  a  wrong  to  both  our 
Lord's  earthly  parents?  Arc  Ave  to  make  that  righteous  son 
of  Jacob  the  first  Ebionite?  Are  we  to  believe  that  the 
blessed  Virgin  thus  strangely  threw  off  that  holy  and  pen- 
sive reserve,  which,  as  I  have  remarked,  seems  her  charac- 
teristic throughout  the  Gospel  history  ?  It  cannot  be.  That 
visit  was  not  to  receive  consolation  for  wrong  and  unkind- 
ness  from  man,  but  to  confer  with  a  wise  heart  on  trans- 
cendent blessings  from  God,  which  the  unaided  spirit  even 
of  Mary  of  Nazareth  might  not  at  first  be  able  completely 
to  grasp  and  to  realize.  And  to  whom  could  she  go  so  nat- 
urally as  to  one  toward  whom  the  wonder-working  power 
of  God  had  been  so  signally  displayed.  Nay,  docs  not  the 
allusion  to  her  "kinswoman  Elisabeth,"  in  the 

_  -it  t  i  Luke  i.  3C. 

angel  s  concluding  words,  suggest  the  very 
quarter  to  which  she  was  to  turn  for  further  spiritual  support, 
and  for  yet  more  accumulated  verification?  To  her,  then,  the 
Virgin  at  once  hastens.     A  few  days  2  would  bring  the  un- 
looked-for visitant  to  the  "city  of  Juda," — 

LxiXc  i.  3D. 

whether  the   nearer  village   which   tradition 

still  points  to  as  the  home  of  Zacharias  and  Elisabeth,3  or 

1  See  Lange,  Leben  Jcsu,  i.  2.  5,  Vol.  ii.  p.  84  so,.;  fully  and  satisfactorily 
answered  by  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Ev.  Gesch.  §  45,  p.  211  sq.  There  seems  no  suffi- 
cicnt  reason  tor  placing,  with  Alford  ami  others,  what  is  recorded  in  Matt.  i. 
IS— 25  before  this  journey.  The  discovery  noticed  in  Matt.  i.  18  (e  vp  f  dy  Se 
tlirt  Oia  ih  airpocrS6KT)Toi'.  Euthvm.),  and  the  events  which  followed,  would  seem 
much  more  naturally  to  have  taken  place  after  the  Virgin's  return.  So  rightly 
August.  </.  ( 'onsi  nsu  Evang.  n.  17,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1081  (ed.  Migne).  Comp.  Teschen- 
dorf, Sfftiopt.  Evang.  p.  xxi. 

-'  If  Hebron  (see  below)  be  considered  the  Virgin's  destination,  the  distance 
could  not  have  been  much  short  of  100  English  miles,  and  would  probably  have 
taken  at  least  four  days.  We  learn  from  I)]-.  Kobinson's  Itinerary  that  the  time 
from  Hebron  to  .Jerusalem,  with  camels,  was  in  his  case  8h.  15m.,  and  from  Jeru- 
salem to  Nazareth,  with  mules.  29h.  45m.  The  rate  of  tra\  elling  with  the  former 
is  estimated  at  about  two  geographical  miles  an  honr,  and  with  the  later  some- 
what less  than  three.  See  Robinson's  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  pp.  668, 574 (ed.  2).  -V 
Jcnmed  dissertation  on  the  rate  of  a  day's  journey  will  be  found  in  Greswell, 
Dissertations,  Vol.  h  .  p,  625  sq.  (ed.  2). 

;  Now  called  Ain  Karim,  and  a  short  distance  from  Jerusalem.  Tts  claims  arc 
-trough-  supported  by  Dr.  Thomson  in  his  excellent  work,  The  Land  and  the 

6 


62  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

the  more  remote  town  of  Juta,  or  perhaps,  more  probably, 
ancient  and  priestly  Hebron,1  which  Jewish  tradition  has 
fixed  upon  as  the  birth-place  of  the  last  and  greatest  scion 
of  the  old  dispensation.2    There  she  finds,  and  there,  as  St. 
Luke  especially  notices,  she  salutes,  the  future 
mother  of  the  Baptist.     That  salutation,  per- 
chance, was  of  a  nature  that  served,  under  the  inspiration 
of  the  Spirit,  in  a  moment  to  convey  all.     Elisabeth,  yea, 
and  the  son  of  Elisabeth,  felt  the  deep  significance  of  that 
greeting.3     The  aged  matron  at  once  breaks  forth  into  a 
mysterious  welcome  of  holy  joy,  and  with  a 
loud  voice,  the  voice  of  loftiest  spiritual  exal- 
tation, she  blesses  the  chosen  one  who  had 
come  under  the  shadow  of  her  roof,  adding  that  reassur- 
ance which  seems  to  supply  us  with  the  clew  to  the  right 
understanding  of  the  whole,  "  and  blessed  is  she  that  be- 
lieved :  for  there  shall  be  a  performance  of 

Ver.  45. 

those  things  which  were  told  her  from  the 
Lord." 
We  need  not  pause  on  this  inspired  greeting,  and  on  the 


Bool;  (Vol.  ii.  p.  537),  and  seem  to  rest  mainly  on  the  concurrent  traditions  of  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Churches.    See,  however,  below,  note  2. 

1  This  last  supposition,  which  is  that  of  Grotius,  Lightfoot,  and  others,  is  per- 
haps slightly  the  most  probable,  as  Hebron  appears  to  have  been  preeminently 
one  of  the  cities  of  the  Priests.  See  Josh.  xxi.  11,  and  comp.  Lightfoot,  Ilor. 
Hebr.  on  Luke  i.  39,  Vol.  ii.  p.  386  (Loud.  1684).  The  second  supposition  is  due  to 
Reland,  (Palmst.  p.  870),  and  is  adopted  by  Robinson  (Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  206, 
cd.  2),  who  identities  it  with  the  modern  Yutta.  The  supposition  that  'lovSa  is 
only  a  corrupted  form,  by  a  softer  pronunciation,  of  'Iouto  (Reland),  is  highly 
questionable;  no  trace  of  such  a  reading  occurs  in  any  of  the  ancient  manu- 
scripts. 

a  See  Otho,  Lex.  Rabbin,  p.  324,  and  compare  Joshua  xxi.  11,  where  Hebron  is 
specially  denned  as  being  "in  the  hill-country  of  Judah."  This  general  defini- 
tion of  locality  is  perhaps  slightly  less  suitable  to  the  first-mentioned  place.  Ain 
Karim,  which,  though  in  the  uplands  of  Judaea,  is  scarcely  in  that  part  which 
seems  commonly  to  have  been  known  as  "the  hill-country.*'  Scpp  (Lehen  Chr. 
Vol.  ii.  p.  8)  cites  Talm.  Ilieros.  "Schevith,"  fol.  38,  4,  —  "  Quodnam  est  monta- 
num  Judass?  mons  regalis.'5 

3  It  has  been  well,  though  perhaps  somewhat  fancifully  said  by  Euthymius: 
'O  n(v  Xpio-ibs  e<p&ty£a7o  Sia  tov  ffTS/xaros  rrjs  ISias  n7]Tp6s-  b  5e  'Iwavv-ns 
iJKovtTe  5«x  tSiv  &toiv  ttjs  oiKelas  /u.T)Tp6s,  xal  4irtyvovs  virtppvais  rbu  cavrov 
SfinroTTjv  txvfKJipvfcv  alnbv  rw  cr/aprij/xaTt. —  Comment,  in  Luc.  I.  41. 


LECT.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  G3 

exalted  hymn  of  praise  uttered  in  response  by  the  Virgin, 
save  to  protest  against  the  discreditable,  and, 

1  °  Internal  truthM- 

to   use  the  mildest  term,  the  unreasonable     «.>.«  of  the  two  m- 

.  .  ,  -I  ,  ttpircd  canticli  s. 

attempts  that  have  been  made  to  throw 
doubt  on  the  credibility  of  the  sacred  narrative,  by  ap- 
pealing to  the  improbability  of  these  so-called  lyrical  effu- 
sions1 on  the  part  of  Mary  and  Elisabeth.  Lyrical 
effusions!  What!  are  we  to  say  that  this  strange  and  un- 
looked-for meeting  on  the  part  of  the  mother  of  the  Fore- 
runner and  the  mother  of  the  Redeemer  was  as  common- 
place and  prosaic  as  that  of  any  two  matrons  of  Israel 
that  might  have  met  unexpectedly  under  the  terebinths2 
of  Hebron?  Are  we  so  utterly  to  believe  in  those  wretched 
Epicurean  views  of  the  history  of  our  race,  as  to  conceive 
it  possible  that  the  greatest  events  connected  with  it  were 
unmarked  by  all  circumstances  of  higher  spiritual  exalta- 
tion? If  there  be  only  that  grain  of  truth  in  the  Evangeli- 
cal history  that  our  adversaries  may  be  disposed  to  concede  ; 
if  there  be  any  truth  in  those  ordinary  psychological  laws, 
to  which,  when  it  serves  their  purpose,  they  are  not  slow 
to  appeal ;  then,  beyond  all  doubt,  both  Elisabeth  and  the 
Virgin  could  not  be  imagined  to  have  met  in  any  way  less 
striking  than  that  which  is  recorded  ;  their  words  of  greet- 
ing could  have  been  none  other  than  those  we  find  assigned 
to  them  by  the  Evangelist.3  Every  accent  in  the  saluta- 
tion of  the  elder  matron  is  true  to  the  princijdes  of  our 
common  nature  when  subjected  to  the  highest  influences; 

1  Compare  Schleiermaclier,  Essay  on  St.  Luke,  p.  24;  well  and  completely 
answered  by  Dr.  31  ill  in  his  admirable  comments  on  these  inspired  hymns.  Sec 
Observations  <m  Pantheistic  Principles,  Part  n.  3,  p.  39  sq. 

-  Jvitto,  ('!/<•/.  s.  v.  "Alan." 

::  ••  Such  a  vision  of  coming  power  and  light  and  majesty  as  these  hymns  indi- 
cate,—  a  picture  BO  vivid  as  to  the  blessedness  oft  he  approaching  reign,  so  indis- 
tinct and  void  as  to  the  means  by  which  that  blessedness  was  to  be  realized,  —  in 
w  hii'li,  while  the  view  of  faith  is  so  concentred  on  the  Source  of  salvation,  then 
initially  manifested  the  whole  detail  of  His  acts  and  the  particulars  of  His 
redemption  continue  closely  wrapped  up  in  the  figure  and  symbol  which  repre- 
sented them  in  the  ancient  dispensation,  — such  a  vision  could  belong  only  to 
the  particular  position  assigned  to  it.  in  the  boundary  of  the  old  and  new  cove- 
nants."—Mill,  Observations,  Part  n.  3,  p.  51. 


64  THE   BIRTH   AND    INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

every  cadence  of  the  Virgin's  hymn  is  in  most  life-like 
accordance  with  all  we  know  of  the  speaker,  and  with  all 
we  can  imagine  of  the  circumstances  of  this  momentous 
meeting.  O  no,  let  us  not  hesitate  to  express  our 
deepest  and  heartiest  conviction  that  the  words  we  have 
here  are  no  collection  of  Scriptural  phrases,  no  artful  com- 
position of  an  imaginative  or  credulous  writer,  but  the 
very  words  that  fell  from  the  lips  of  Mary  of  Nazareth, — 
words  which  the  rapture  of  the  moment  and  the  inspiration 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  alike  called  forth,  and  alike  imprinted 
indelibly  on  the  memory  both  of  her  that  spake  and  her 
that  listened.1  All  speaks  truth,  life,  and  reality.  On  the 
one  hand,  the  diction  of  the  Old  Testament  that  pervades 
this  sublime  canticle, — the  reminiscences  perchance  of  the 
hymn  of  Hannah,  type  of  her  who  spake  ;  on  the  other 
hand,  the  conscious  allusions  to  mysterious  blessings  that 
Hannah  never  knew,  —  all  place  before  us,  as  in  a  por- 
traiture of  most  living  truth,  the  rapt  maiden  of  Nazareth, 
pouring  forth  her  stored-up  memories  of  history  and 
prophecy  in  one  full  stream  of  Messianic  joyfulness  and 
praise. 

After  a  few  months'  sojourn  with  Elisabeth  the  Virgin 
returns,2  and  then,  or  soon  after  it,  came  the 

Return   qf  the  _  '  '  ' 

virgin,  and  the  rev-     trial  of  faith  to  the  righteous  Joseph.     This 

elation  to  Joseph.  . 

fet.  Matthew  relates  to  us  briefly,  but  with 
some  suggestive  and  characteristic  marks  of  living  truth 
to  which  we  may  for  a  moment  advert. 

1  Even  without  specially  ascribing  to  the  Virgin,  as  indeed  we  fairly  might  do, 
that  spiritually-strengthened  power  of  recollection  which  was  promised  to  the 
Apostles  of  her  Son  (John  xiv.  2G),  we  may  justly  remind  our  opponents  that  the 
rhythmical  character  of  these  canticles  would  infallibly  impress  them  on  the 
minds  of  both  the  speakers  with  all  that  peculiar  force  and  vividness  which,  we 
must  often  observe,  metre  does  in  our  own  cases.   C'omp.  Mill,  Observations,  p.  42. 

2  It  has  been  doubted  whether  the  notices  of  time  may  not  lead  us  to  suppose 
that  the  Virgin  staid  with  Elisabeth  till  the  birth  of  the  Baptist,  and  that  St. 
Luke  has  specified  the  return  of  the  Virgin,  in  the  place  he  has  done,  merely  to 
connect  closely  the  notices  of  her  journey  and  her  return.  See  Wicseler,  Citron. 
Synops.  i.  3,  p.  151.  There  is  some  plausibility  in  the  supposition;  but,  on  the 
whole,  it  seems  more  natural  to  conceive  that  the  events  took  place  in  (he  order 
in  which  they  are  described.    Couip.  Greswell,  Prolegomena,  Cap.  IV.  p.  178. 


Lect.  II.  OF    OUR    LOUD.  65 

How  very  striking  is  the  fact  that,  while  to  the  Virgin 
the  heavenly  communication  is  made  directly 
by  an  angel,  the  communication  to  the  handi-       ^ifl'-rcm  form  v 

•>  ~       '  the  utvine  messages. 

craftsman  of  Galilee  '  is  made  by  means  of  a 
dream   of  the  night.     How   suggestive  is  it         iiatt.i.w. 
that,  while  to  the  loftier  spirit  of  Mary  the 
name  of  Jesus  is  revealed  with  all  the  prophetic  associa- 
tions of  more  than  David's   glories,  to  Joseph,  perchance 
the  aged  Joseph,2  who  might  have  long  seen  and  realized 
his  own  spiritual  needs,  and   the  needs   of  those  around 
him,  it  is  specially  said,  "  thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus ; 
for   He   shall  save   Ills  people  from  their 
sins."     Surely,  brethren,  such  things  cannot 
be  cunningly  devised;  such  things  must  work,  and  ought 
to  work,  conviction  ;  such  things  must  needs  make  us  feel, 
and  feel  with  truth,  that  this  and  the  following  holy  chap- 
ters, so  carped  at  by  the  doubting   spirits   both   of  earlier 
and  of  later  days,  are  verily  what  the  Church  has  ever 
held  them  to  be, — the  special,  direct,  and  undoubted  reve- 
lations of  the  Eternal  Spirit  of  God.3 

1  Ckrysostom  notices  the  different  nature  of  the  heavenly  communications, 
assigning  however  what  scarcely  seems  the  true  reason,  —  the  faith  of  Joseph 
(triarbs  i\v  6  avilp,  Kal  ouk  e'SeiYo  ttjs  <j\pews  ravTrjs).  If  we  may  venture  to 
assign  a  reason,  it  would  rather  seem  referable,  first,  to  the  difference  of  the  sub- 
jects of  the  two  revelations,  —  that  to  the  Virgin  needing  the  most  distinct  exter- 
nal attestation  (Euthym.);  secondly,  to  some  difference  in  the  respective  natures 
of  Joseph  and  Mary,  and  in  their  powers  of  receiving  and  appreciating  divine 
communications,    Comp.  Lange,  Lcbeu  Jesu,  n.  2,  5,  Vol.  ii.  p.  89. 

-  Without  referring  to  the  apocryphal  writers,  or  seeking  to  specify  with  the 
exactness  of  EpiphaniHS  (^pea^vrris  6yhor\KOVTa  iruiv  ir\eia>  v)  e'Actoffcu,  Hter. 
j.i.  10),  it  may  perhaps  be  said  that  such  seems  to  have  been  the  prevailing  opin- 
ion of  tin-  early  Church.  That  he  died  in  the  lifetime  of  our  Lord  has  been 
justly  inferred  from  the  absence  of  his  name  in  those  passages  in  the  Gospels 
where  allusion  is  made  to  the  Virgin  and  the  Lord's  brethren.  See  Blunt, 
Veracity  <>/  Evangelists,  §  8,  p.  38;  and  for  notices  and  reff.  as  to  the  supposed 
age  of  Joseph  at  our  Lord's  birth,  see  the  curious  but  often  very  instructive 
work  of  Hofirnann,  I.<i><  n  •/<  six  nach  den  Apoerypfo  n,  \  10,  p.  02. 

3  It  is  painful  to  notice  the  hardihood  with  which  the  genuineness  of  these 
chapters  has  been  called  in  question,  even  by  some  of  the  better  class  of  critics. 
See,  for  example,  Norton,  G\  in/in,  ness  o/  Gospels,  Note  a,  §  5,  Vol.  i.  p.  201  sq. 
When  we  remember  (1)  that  they  are  contained  in  every  manuscript,  uncial  or 
cm-he,  and  in  every  version,  eastern  or  western,  that  most  of  the  early  Fathers 
Cite  them,  and  that  early  enemies  of  Christianity  appealed  to  them  (Grig.  Ccls.  I. 

6* 


66  THE   BIRTH  AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

And  now  the  fulness  of  time  was  come.     By  one  of 
those    mysterious    workings    whereby   God 

Journey  to  Beth-  "*  °  J 

lehem,  ami  taxing     makes   the   very  worldliness    of  man    bring 

under  Quirinus.  1..1  i     ,•  <■    tt-  i  i 

about  the   completion  of  llis  own  heavenly 
counsels,  the  provincial  taxing  or  enrolment  of  the  per- 
sons or  estates1  of  all  that  were  under  the  Roman  sway, — 
a  taxing  almost  proved  by  independent  his- 
torical  induction  to  have  been  made  even  as 
St.  Luke  relates  it,  during  the  presidency  of  Cyrenius2 — 

38,  ii.  32);  when  we  observe  (2)  the  obvious  connection  between  the  beginning 
of  ch.  iii.  and  the  end  of  ch.  ii.,  and  between  ch.  iv.  13  and  ii.  23;  and  when 
we  remark  (3)  the  exact  accordance  of  diction  with  that  of  the  remaining  chap- 
ters of  the  Gospel,  —  it  becomes  almost  astonishing  that  even  a  priori  prejudice 
should  not  have  abstained  at  any  rate  from  so  hopeless  a  course  as  that  of 
impugning  the  genuineness  of  these  chapters.  To  urge  that  these  chapters  were 
wanting  in  the  mutilated  and  falsified  gospel  of  the  Ebionites  (Epiph.  Hor.  xxx. 
13),  or  that  they  were  cut  away  by  the  heretical  Tatian  (Theodoret,  liter.  Fab.  I. 
20),  is  really  to  concede  their  genuineness,  and  to  bewray  the  reason  why  it  was 
impugned.  For  additional  notices  and  arguments,  see  Griesbach,  Epimetron  ad 
Comment.  Crit.  p.  47  sq. ;  Gersdorf,  Beitrdge,  p.  38;  and  Patritius,  de  Evangeliis, 
Quaest.  viii.  Vol.  i.  p.  29  sq. 

1  This  point  is  so  doubtful  and  debatable  that  I  prefer  adopting  this  more 
general  form  of  expression.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  1.  2,  p.  75  sq., 
and  Greswell,  Dissert.  No.  xiv.  Vol.  i.  p.  541  sq.  On  the  general  lexical  distinc- 
tion between  airoypaty))  and  anoTi/xriiTts  no  great  reliance  can  be  placed :  in 
Joseph.  Ant.  XVII.  13.  5,  xvm.  1. 1,  the  words  appear  used  interchangeably.  See 
Wieseler,  I.  c,  and  Meyer  in  loc.  This  much  may  perhaps  be  said,  that  if  it  was 
at  first  only  an  enrolment  per  capita,  it  was  one  that  had,  and  perhaps  was  per- 
fectly well  known  to  have,  a  prospective  reference  to  property. 

2  Without  entering  at  length  into  this  vexed  question,  we  may  remark,  for  the 
benefit  of  the  general  reader,  that  the  simple  and  grammatical  meaning  of  the 
words,  as  they  appear  in  all  the  best  MSS.  [B.  alone  omits  v  before  airoypiuprj], 
must  be  this:  "this  taxing  took  place  as  a  first  one  while  Cyrenius  was  gov- 
ernor of  Syria;  "  and  that  the  difficulty  is  to  reconcile  this  with  the  assertion  of 
Tertullian  (contr.  Marc.  iv.  19),  that  the  taxing  took  place  under  Sentius  Satur- 
ninus,  and  with  the  apparent  historical  fact  that  Quirinus  did  not  become  Presi- 
dent of  Syria  till  nine  or  ten  years  afterwards.  See  the  Cenotaphia  Pisana  of 
Cardinal  Korisius,  Dissert,  n.,  and  the  authorities  in  Greswell,  Dissertations,  No. 
xiv.  Vol.  i.  p.  466  sq.  (ed.  2).  There  are  apparently  only  two  sound  modes  of 
explaining  the  apparent  contradiction  (I  dismiss  the  mode  of  regarding  TrpairTj 
as  equivalent  to  irpOTtpa  as  forced  and  artificial),  either  by  supposing,  (a)  that 
TiyefjiovevovTos  is  to  be  taken  in  a  general  and  not  a  special  sense,  and  to  imply 
the  duties  of  a  commissioner  extraordinary,  —  a  view  perhaps  best  and  must 
ably  advocated  by  the  Abbe  Sanclemente,  de  Vulg.  JEraz.  Dionys.  Emend.  Book 
iv.  ch.  2,  but  open  to  the  objection  arising  from  the  special  and  localizing  term 
t?1S  Xvpias  (see  Meyer,  Komment.  Mber  Lick.  p.  221);  or  by  supposing,  (b)  thai, 
under  historical  circumstances  imperfectly  known  to  us,  Quirinus  was  either  de 
facto  or  de  jure  President  of  Syria  exactly  as  St.  Luke  seems  to  specify.    In 


Lect.  II.  OP   OUR  LORD.  07 

brings  the  descendants  of  David  to  David's  own  city. 
Idle  and  mischievous  doubts  have  sought  to 
question  the  accuracy  of  this  portion  of  the 
Evangelical  history,  to  which  we  can  here  pause  only  to 
return  the  briefest  answer.1  But  this  I  will  presume  to 
say,  that  I  feel  certain  no  fair  and  honest  investigator  can 
study  the  various  political  considerations  connected  with 
this  difficult  question,  without  ultimately  coming  to  the 
conclusion,  not  only  that  the  account  of  St.  Luke  is  re- 
concilable with  contemporary  history,  but  that  it  is  con- 
firmed by  it,  in  a  manner  most  striking  and  most  persua- 
sive. When  we  remember  that  the  kingdom  of  Herod 
was  not  yet  formally  converted  into  a  Roman  province, 
and  yet  was  so  dependent  upon  the  imperial  city2  as  to  be 
practically  amenable  to  all  its  provincial  edicts,  how  very 
striking  it  is  to  find,  —  in  the  first  place,  that  a  taxing 
took  place   at  a  time   when  such  a  general  edict  can  be 


favor  of  this  latter  supposition  we  have  the  thrice-repeated  assertion  of  Justin 
Martyr  (Apol.  I.  ch.  34,  46,  Tri/pho,  ch.  7S),  that  Quirinus  teas  President  at  the 
time  in  question,  and  the  interesting  fact  recently  brought  to  light  by  Zumpt, 
(Commentationes  Epigraphies,  Part  n.  Berl.  1844),  that  owing  to  Cilicia,  when 
separated  from  Cyprus,  being  united  to  Syria,  Quirinus.  as  governor  of  the  first- 
mentioned  province,  was  really  also  governor  of  the  last-mentioned,  —  whether 
in  any  kind  of  association  with  Satiuninus  (see  Wordsw.  in  foe.),  or  otherwise,  can 
hardly  be  ascertained,  —  and  that  his  subsequent  more  special  connection  with 
Syria  led  his  earlier,  and  apparently  brief,  connection  to  be  thus  accurately 
noticed.  This  last  view,  to  say  the  least,  deserves  great  consideration,  and  has. 
been  adopted  by  Merivale,  Hist,  of  Romans,  Vol.  iv.  p.  457.  The  treatises  and 
disoussions  on  this  subject  are  extremely  numerous.  Those  best  deserving  con- 
sideration are,  perhaps,  Greswell,  Dissert.  No.  xiv.;  Buschke,  nberden  vwrZe.it 
ti,  r  <,,  hurt ./.  s.  <  'hr.  //'  haltt  ru  n  <  'ensus,  Bresl.  1840;  Wieseler,  '  Tvron.  Synops.  p. 
73  Bq.  (in  these  TTfiwrrj  is  explained  away);  and  l'alritius,  </<_•  Evangeliis,  Dissert. 
xviii.  Book  in.  p.  161,  where  (a)  18  advocated. 

1  The  main  objections  that  have  been  urged  against  this  portion  of  St.  Luke's 
narrative  are  well  examined  and  convincingly  refuted  by  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synops.  I.  2.  pp.  7.") — 122.  The  most  important  work  for  general  reference  on 
the  historical  and  political  circumstances  connected  with  this  event,  beside  the 
above  work  of  Wieseler,  is  that  of  Hnschke,  Uber  </<  n  vur  /.<  it  u.  s.  «•.,  referred 
i.i  in  the  foregoing  note. 

-See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  r.  2,  p.  98  sq.  Passages  which  prove  the 
dependence  of  Judaea,  especially  as  tributary  to  the  Roman  government,  are 
cited  by  Greswell,  Dissert.  No.  xxni.  Vol.  ii.  p.  375.  For  further  facts  and 
reference,  see  Winer,  ItWB.  Art.  "Judaa,"  Vol  i.  p.  G30. 


68  THE   BIRTH   AND    INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

proved  to  have  been  in  force  ;x  and,  in  the  next  place,  to 
find  that  that  taxing  in  Judaea  is  incidentally  described  as 
having  taken  place  according  to  the  yet  recognized  cus- 
toms of  the  country,  —  that  it  was,  in  fact,  essentially  im- 
perial and  Roman  in  origin,  and  yet  Herodian  and  Jewish 
in  form.  How  strictly,  how  minutely  consistent  is  it  with 
actual  historical  relations  to  find  that  Joseph,  who  under 
purely  Roman  law  might,  perhaps,  have  been  enrolled  at 
Nazareth,2  is  here  described  by  the  Evangelist  as  journey- 
ing to  be  enrolled  at  the  town  of  his  forefathers,  "  because 
he  was  of  the  house  and  lineage  3  of  David." 
This  accordance  of  the  sacred  narrative  with 
the  perplexed  political  relations  of  the  intensely  national, 
yet  all  but  subject  Judaea,  is  so  exact  and  so  convincing, 
that  we  may  even  profess  ourselves  indebted  to  scepticism 
for  having  raised  a  question  to  which  an  answer  may  be 
given  at  once  so  fair,  so  explicit,  and  so  conclusive.  It 
seems  almost  idle  to  pause  further  on  this  portion  of  the 
narrative  and  to  seek  for  reasons  why  the  Virgin  accom- 
panied Joseph  in  this  enforced  journey  to  the  city  of  his 
fathers.4     Is  it  positively  necessary  to  ascribe  to  her  some 

1  See  the  Monumentum  Ancyranum,  as  cited  and  commented  on  by  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Synops.  p.  90  sq.,  and  compare  Bynajus,  de  Natali  Jes.  Chr.  I.  3,  p.  300; 
Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  No.  vm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  162. 

2  This  is  the  objection  stated  in  its  usual  form;  but  it  seems  very  doubtful  if, 
even  on  merely  general  historical  data,  it  can  be  substantiated.  In  fact  Huschke 
{uber  den  Cens.  p.  116  sq.)  has  apparently  demonstrated  the  contrary,  and  proved 
that  in  every  Roman  census  each  individual  was  eurolled  where  he  had  his 
"  forum  originis."  This,  however,  need  not  be  pressed,  as  the  journey  of  Joseph 
is  so  much  more  plausibly  attributed  to  the  Jewish  form,  in  accordance  with 
which  the  census  was  conducted.  Comp.  Bynaius,  de  Natali  Jes.  Chr.  I.  3,  p. 
337,  and  a  good  article  by  Winer,  RWB.  "  Schatzung."  Vol.  ii.  p.  398—401. 

3  The  terms  here  used,  oIkos  and  Trarpia,  seem  to  be  specially  and  exactly 
chosen.  The  latter  is  used  with  reference  to  the  fl'inS'SB  or  gentes,  which 
traced  their  origin  to  the  twelve  patriarchs,  the  former  to  the  r"pS  IVta  or 
fami/la',  of  which  these  latter  were  composed.  See  Winer,  JIJFB.  Art. 
"  Stamme,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  513  sq. 

4  If  the  census  had  been  purely  Roman  in  its  form,  it  would  seem  that  the 
presence  of  the  Virgin  would  certainly  not  have  been  needed,  the  giving  in  of 
the  names  of  women  and  children  being  considered  sufficient.  Comp.  Dionys. 
Halic.  iv.  15;  Huschke,  uber  den  Cens.  p.  121.  As,  however,  in  accordance  with 
the  view  taken  in  the  text,  it  is  to  be  considered  rather  as  Jewish  in  form,  the 
presence  of  Mary  is  still  less  to  be  accounted  for  on  any  purely  legal  reasons. 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  69 

% 

inheritance  which  required  her  presence  at  the  enrolment 
at  Bethlehem?  Is  it  really  not  enough  for  us  that  St. 
Luke  relates  that  she  did  take  this  journey;  and  is  it  so 
strange  that  at  that  time  of  popular  gatherings,  and  per- 
haps popular  excitement,1  she  should  brave  the  exhaustion 
of  a  long  journey,  rather  than  lose  the  protection  of  one 
to  whom  she  must  have  been  bound  by  ties  of  the  holiest 
nature,  and  who  shared  with  her  the  knowledge  of  a  mys- 
tery that  had  been  sealed  in  silence  since  the  foundations 
of  the  world  ?  On  such  subordinate  and  bootless  inquiries 
we  need,  I  am  sure,  delay  no  longer. 

And  now  the  mysterious  hour,  which  an  old  apocryphal 
writer  has  described  Avith  such  striking  vet 

.  .  „  .    ,         .    *?    '  The  Nativity  and 

such  curious  imagery,-  was  nigh  at  hand.  u»  attendant  <.»- 
Very  soon  after  the  arrival  at  Bethlehem, 
perchance  on  the  self-same  night,  in  one  of  the  limestone 
caverns,  —  for  I  see  no  reason  for  rejecting  the  statement 
of  one  who  was  born  little  more  than  a  century  afterwards, 
and  not  forty  miles  from  the  same  spot,3  —  in  one  of  the 


The  favorite  hypothesis  that  she  was  an  heiress,  and  possessor  of  a  real  estate  at 
Bethlehem,  and  so  legally  hound  to  appear  (Olsh.  in  loc),  is  now  generally,  and 
as  it  would  seem  rightly,  given  up.  See  Winer,  ltWB.  Art.  "Schatzung,"  Vol. 
ii.  p.  401. 

1  Compare  the  sensible  remarks  of  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  128. 

2  The  sort  of  pause,  as  it  were,  in  all  things  that  marked  this  most  momentous 
period  in  the  world's  history  is  thus  curiously  described  in  the  Protevangelivm 
Jacobi,  cap.  18:  "  And  I  Joseph  was  walking,  and  yet  was  not  walking;  and  I 
looked  up  into  the  sky,  and  I  saw  the  sky  in  amazement;  and  I  looked  up  to 
the  pole  of  heaven  and  I  saw  it  standing  still,  and  the  birds  of  the  air  in  tran- 
« 1 1 1 i  1  calm;  and  1  directed  my  gaze  on  the  earth,  and  I  saw  a  howl-like  table, 
and  laboring  men  around  it,  and  their  bauds  were  in  the  bowl,  and  they  who 
had  meat  in  their  mouths  were  not  eating,  and  they  that  were  taking  up  food 
raised  it  not  up,  and  they  that  were  bringing  it  up  to  their  mouths  were  not 
bringing  it  up;  but  the  countenances  of  all  were  directed  upwards.  And  I  saw 
6heep  in  the  act  of  being  driven,  and  they  were  standing  still ;  and  the  she). herd 
was  raising  his  hand  to  smite  them,  and  bis  arm  remained  aloft.  And  I  gazed 
on  the  torrent-course  of  a  river,  and  I  beheld  the  kids  lowering  their  brails 
towards  it  ami  nut  drinking,  and  all  things  in  their  courses  for  the  moment 
suspended"  (ed.  Tisoh.  pp.  .°.:i.  84).    Compare  Sofmann,  l.<  /■>  n  Jeau,  i>.  110. 

8  The  statement  of  Justin  Martyr,  who  was  born  at  gichem,  about  a.  1).  103.  is 
Mix  distinct:  Ttvvri^iiirct%  5e  tots  rou  iratSiov  iv  B>)dA.«f'/u,  In-eiSI)  *\w<rr]<p 
ouk  fix*"  tv  TJj  Kicfj.7]  (Kcifi)  iTov  KaraAvcrai,  iv  a  tt  7;  A.  a  i  to  run  avvtyyvs 
ttjs  ku>ht)s  KUTtAucre.—  Tryph.  cap.  78,  Vol.  ii   p.  264  (ed.  Otto).    This  ancient 


70  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

caverns  in  that  narrow  ridge  of  long  gray  hill  on  which 
stands  the  city  of  David,1  was  the  Redeemer  born  into  a 
world  that  rejected  Him,  even  in  His  mother's  womb. 

How  brief  and  how  simple  are  the  words  that  relate 
these  homely  circumstances  of  the  Lord's  Nativity.  How 
surely  do  the  mother's  recital  and  the  mother's  stored- 
up  memories  come  forth  in  the  artless  touches  of  detail.2 
And  yet  with  how  much  of  holy  and  solemn  reserve  is 
that  first  hour  of  a  world's  salvation  passed  over  by  the 
Evangelist.  We  would  indeed  fain  inquire  more  into  the 
wonders  of  that  mysterious  night;  and  they  are  not 
wholly  withheld  from  us.  The  same  Evangelist  that  tells 
us  that  the  mid-day  sun  was  darkened  during  the  last 
hours  of  the  Redeemer's  earthly  life,  tells  us 

Luke  xxm.  44. 

also  that  in    His  first  hours  the   night  was 

turned  into  more  than  day,  and  that  heavenly 

glories  shone  forth,  not  unwitnessed,  while 

angels  announce  to  shepherd-watchers 3  on  the  grassy  slopes 

tradition  has  been  repeated  by  Origen  (Cels.  I.  51),  Eusebius  (Demonstr.  Evang. 
vn.  2),  Jerome  (Epist.  ad  Marcell.  xxiv.),  and  other  ancient  writers,  and  has 
been  generally  admitted  by  modern  writers  and  travellers  as  far  from  improba- 
ble. Comp.  Stanley.  Palest,  p.  438.  Dr.  Thomson  ( The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  507),  though  admitting  the  ambiguity  of  the  tradition,  opposes  it  on  reasons 
derived  from  the  context  of  the  sacred  narrative,  which  are  however  far  from 
convincing.  The  Virgin  might  easily  have  been  removed  to  the  ouc'ia  specified 
in  Matt.  ii.  11,  before  the  arrival  of  the  Magi.  For  further  details  and  reff.  see 
Thilo,  Codex  Apocr.  p.  381  sq.;  Hofmaun,  Leben  Jesu,  p.  108;  and  a  very  good 
article  by  Rev.  G.  Williams,  in  the  Ecclesiologist.  for  1848. 

1  The  reader  who  may  have  an  interest  in  the  outward  aspects  of  these  sacred 
localities  will  find  a  colored  sketch  of  Bethlehem  and  its  neighborhood  in  Rob- 
erts's Holy  Land,  Vol.  ii.  Plate  84.  The  illustrations,  however,  most  strongly 
recommended  by  an  Oriental  traveller  of  some  experience  to  the  writer  of  this 
note,  as  giving  the  truest  idea  of  the  sacred  localities,  are  those  of  Frith,  and  the 
excellent  views  of  Jerusalem  and  its  environs  executed  by  Robertson  and  Beato 
(Gambart  and  Co.). 

2  See  above,  p.  56,  note  2,  where  this  subject  is  briefly  noticed. 

3  Luke  ii.  8,  aypavAovvres  ku\  tyvXaaaovTis  (pvAaxas  Tijs  vvktos  ;  the  last 
words  defining  the  time  and  qualifying  the  two  preceding  participles.  The  fact 
here  specified  has  been  often  used  in  the  debated  subject  of  the  exact  time  of 
year  at  which  our  Lord's  birth  took  place.  But  little,  however,  can  really  be 
derived  from  it,  as  the  frequently  quoted  notice  of  the  Talmudical  writers  (see 
Lightfoot  on  Luke  ii.  8),  that  the  herds  were  brought  in  from  the  fields  about  the 
beginning  of  November  and  driven  out  again  about  March,  is  merely  general, 
and  might  include  so  many  modifications  arising  from  season  or  locality  (see 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  71 

of  Bethlehem  the  tidings  of  great  joy,  and  proclaim  the 
new-born  Saviour.  How  mysterious  are 
the  ways  of  God's  dealings  Avith  men.  The 
Desire  of  all  nations  at  length  come,  the  Saviour  born  into 
an  expectant  world,  and  —  announced  to  village  shepherds. 
What  a  bathos,  what  a  hopeless  bathos  to  the  unbelieving 
or  unmeditative  spirit !  How  noticeable  that  the  Apoc- 
ryphal writers,  who  spin  out  with  the  most  dreary  pro- 
lixity every  other  hint  supplied  by  the  sacred  writers,  pass 
over  this  in  the  fewest  possible  words,1  ami  as  something 
which  they  could  neither  appreciate  nor  understand.  And 
yet  what  a  divine  significance  is  there  in  the  fact,  that  to 
the  spiritual  descendants  of  the  first  type  of  the  Messiah, 
Abel  the  keeper  of  sheep,  the  announcement  is  made  that 
the  great  Shepherd  of  the  lost  sheep  of  humanity  is  born 


Sepp,  Leben  Christ*,  Vol.  i.  p.  213;  Wieseler,  Chrcm.  Synops.  p.  146),  that  it  can- 
not fairly  be  urged  as  conclusive  against  the  traditional  date  in  December.  Nay, 
temporary  circumstances  —  the  large  afflux  of  strangers  to  Bethlehem  —  might 
have  easily  led  to  a  temporary  removal  of  the  cattle  into  some  of  the  milder  val- 
leys to  provide  an  accommodation  of  which  at  least  the  Holy  Family  were, 
obliged  to  avail  themselves.  Still,  it  must  be  said,  the  fact  viewed  simply  does 
seem  to  incline  us  towards  a  period  less  rigorous  than  mid-winter;  and  when  we 
join  with  Ibis  chronological  data  which  appear  positively  to  fix  the  epoch  as  sub- 
Beqnent  to  the  beginning  of  January  (see  Wieseler,  ('/mm.  Synops.  p.  145),  anil 
further,  considerations  derived  from  the  probable  sequence  of  events,  and  the 
times  probably  occupied  by  them,  we  perhaps  may  slightly  lean  to  the  opinion 
thai  early  in  Febr.  (most  probably  A.U.c.  750;  Sulpic.  Sever.  His/.  Soar.  Book 
11.  oh.  39)  was  the  time  of  the  Nativity.  The  question  has  been  discussed  from  a 
very  early  period.  In  the  time  of  Clement  of  Alexandria  (S/n>n>.  I.  21,  Vol.  i. 
p.  407,  ed.  l'ott),  by  whom  it  appears  to  have  been  considered  rather  a  matter  of 
irtpiepyia,  the  traditions  were  anything  but  unanimous  (sonic  selecting  Jan.  IS, 
Borne  Jan.  10,  Others  April  20,  and  even  May  20),  and  it  was  not  till  the  fourth 
century  that  December  25  became  generally  accepted  as  the  exact  date.  See  the 
useful  table  attached  to  the  valuable  dissertation  of  l'atritius,  (In  Kenny.  Book 
m.  111.  p.  276.  Out  of  the  many  treatises  and  discussions  that  have  been  written 
mi  this  subject,  the  following  may  be  specified:  Iltig.  </•  l\*t.  X<i/ir.  Dissert, 
in.;  Jablonsky,  de  Origin  Feat.  Nativ.  Vol.  iii.  p.  317  sq.  (ed.  te  Water);  Span- 
heini.  Dub.  Evangel,  mi.  Vol. ii. p. 208  sq.;  Gre  well,  Dissert,  xii.  Vol.  i.  p.  381 
sq.;  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  132.  <  omparealso  Clinton,  Fasti  Hell.  Vol.  iii. 
p. 256  sq.;  and  Browne,  Ordo  8aelorum,  \  28  sq  ,  p. 26  sq.  A  distinct  Homily 
mi  this  subject  will  be  found  in  Chrysost.  Ilomit.  in  Diem  Natal.  Vol.  ii.  p.  417  sq. 
(ed.  I'.ened.  1884). 

i  See  Pseudo-Matt.  Evang.  cap.  18;  Bvang.  Infant.  Arab.  cap.  4;  and  com- 
pare Hermann,  Leben  Jesu,  p.  117.  Tradition  affects  to  preserve  their  names— • 
Misael,  Acheel,  Cynaous,  and  Stephanas. 


72  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

into   the   world.1     What  a   mysterious   fitness   that   that 
Gospel,  of  which  the  characteristic  was  that 

Jfat.xi.5.  l 

it  was  preached  unto  the  poor,  was  nrst  pro- 
claimed neither  to  the  ceremonial  Pharisee,  who  would 
have  questioned  it,  nor  to  the  worldly  Sadducee,  who 
would  have  despised  it,  nor  to  the  separatist  Essene,2  who 
would  have  given  it  a  mere  sectarian  significance,  but  to 
men  whose  simple  and  susceptible  hearts  made  them  come 
with  haste,  and  see,  and  believe,  and  spread  abroad  the 
wonders  they  had  been  permitted  to  behold.3  Shepherds 
were  the  first  of  men  who  glorified  and  praised  God  for 
their  Saviour;  shepherds  were  the  first  earthly  preachers4 
of  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 

How  far  their  j^raises  and  the  wonders  they  had  to  tell 

1  "It  fell  not  out  amiss  that  shepherds  they  were;  the  news  fitted  them  well. 
It  well  agreed  to  tell  Shepherds  of  the  yeaning  of  a  strange  Lamb,  such  a  Lamb 
as  should  '  take  away  the  sins  of  the  world; '  such  a  Lamb  as  they  might '  send 
to  the  Kuler  of  the  world  for  a  present,'  mitte  Agnum  Dominatori  terra, — 
Esay's  Lamb.  Or  if  ye  will,  to  tell  shepherds  of  the  birth  of  a  Shepherd, 
Ezekiel's  shepherd:  Ecce  suscitabo  vobis  jyastorem,  '  Behold,  I  will  raise  you  a 
Shepherd,' ' the  Chief  Shepherd,' '  the  Great  Shepherd,'  and 'the  Good  Shep- 
herd that  gave  His  life  for  His  flock.'  "  —  Andrewes,  Serm.  v.  Vol.  i.  p.  65  (A.-C. 
Libr.). 

2  The  spiritual  characteristics  and  relations  of  these  three  sects  are  briefly 
but  ably  noticed  by  Lauge,  Leben  Je.su,  II.  1.  1,  Part  I.  p.  17.  The  Pharisee  cor- 
rupted the  current  and  tenor  of  revelation  by  ceremonial  additions,  the  Saddu- 
cee. by  reducing  it  to  a  mere  deistic  morality,  the  Essene  by  idealizing  its  historical 
aspects,  or  by  narrowing  its  widest  principles  and  precepts  into  the  rigidities  of 
a  false  and  morbid  asceticism.  Superstition,  scepticism,  and  schism  alike  found 
in  the  cross  of  Christ  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  a  rock  of  offence.  For  further 
notices  of  these  sects  and  their  dissensions,  see  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Judenthums, 
it.  2.  8,  Vol.  i.  ]>.  197  sq. 

8  '•  Why  was  it  that  the  Angel  went  not  to  Jerusalem,  sought  not  out  the 
Scribes  and  Pharisees,  entered  not  into  the  synagogues  of  the  Jews,  but  found 

shepherds and  preached  the  gospel  to  them?    Because  the  former  were 

corrupt  and  ready  to  be  cut  to  the  heart  with  envy;  while  these  latter  were 
uncorrupt,  affecting  the  old  way  of  living  of  the  patriarchs,  and  also  of  Moses, 
for  these  men  were  shepherds."  —  Origen  ap.  Cramer,  Caten.  Vol.  i.  p.  20.  Com- 
pare, too,  Theophylact  in  loc.  For  some  further  practical  considerations,  see 
Bp.  Taylor,  Life  of  Christ,  Part  I.  ad  Sect  4,  Vol.  i.  p.  45  sq.  (Lond.  1836). 

4  The  first  preachers,  as  Cyril  rightly  observes  (Comment,  on  Luke,  Serm.  II. 
Vol.  i.  p.  18,  Trans].,  Oxf.  1859),  were  angels, —  a  distinction  faintly  hinted  at  by 
the  very  terms  of  the  original:  ws  b.irr)\Stov  air  auirwu  els  rbv  ovpavhv  ol  &yy€- 
Aoi,  Kal  ol  av&  p  ww  o  t  ol  iroi/xeves  ihov  k.  t.  A.  Here  it  need  scarcely  be 
said  we  have  no  more  idle  periphrasis  ("  homo  pastor,"  Drus.),  but  an  opposi- 
tion to  the  preceding  term  &yye\oi.    See  Meyer  in  loc. 


Lect.  II.  OF  OUR   LORD.  73 

of  wrought  on  the  hearts  of  those  who  heard  them,  we  are 
not  enabled  to  say.      The  holy   reserve  of 

"  "  The  circumcision 

the  Virgin  mother,  who  kept  all  these  say-    and  presentation  in 

,        °.  ,  .,i  ,1        the  Temple. 

ings1  and  pondered  them  in  her  heart,  would         Luke  a  ir 
lead  us  to  believe  that  at  any  rate  the  his- 

»       ,  ,  .  Vtr.  10. 

tory  or   the  miraculous  conception  was  not 
generally  divulged ;  and  that  the  Lord's  earthly  parents 
spake  not  beyond  the  small  circle  of  those  immediately 
around   them.     The   circumcision,  from   the 

Luke  ii.  21. 

brief  notice  ot  the  Evangelist,  would  cer- 
tainly seem  to  have  taken  place  with  all  circumstances  of 
privacy  and  solitude,  —  in  apparent  contrast  to  that  of  the 
Forerunner,  which  appears  to  have  been  with  gatherings 
and  rejoicings,2  and  was  marked  by  marvels  that  were 
soon  noised   abroad  throughout  all  the  hill 

Luke  i.65. 

country  of  Judiea.     .Nay,  even  at  the  presen- 
tation in  the  Temple,  more  than  a  month  afterwards,3  the 
Evangelist's  remark,  that  Joseph  and  Mary 

,,      -i  \  i  n  Lukeii.33. 

marvelled  at  fenneon  s  prophecy,  would  seem 

distinctly  to  show  that  no  circumstances  from  without  had 

as  yet  proved  sufficient  to  prepare  them  for  the  mysterious 

welcome  which  awaited  the  infant  Saviour  in  His  Father's 

temple. 

1  The  expression  to.  p'ruj.ara.  ravra  (Luke  ii.  19)  is  rightly  referred  by  most 
modern  commentators,  not  to  the  circumstances  generally  (ret  Trpa.yjxa.ra  -ravra, 
Theoph.),  hut  to  the  things  mentioned  by  the  shepherds;  so  rightly  Euthym. 
in  loc. — ftk  Ttapa  rwv  iroiixtvccv  \a\r]&4vTa.  On  the  reasonableness  of  this 
reserve,  Bee  Mill,  on  Pantheistic  Prino.  n.  1.  2,  p.  212. 

'!■  Even  if  we  limit,  as  perhaps  is  most  grammatically  exrnct,  the  subject  of 
i)Xhov  (Luke  i.  09)  to  those  who  were  to  perform  the  rite  of  circumcision,  the 
context  would  certainly  seem  to  show  that  many  were  present. 

8  The  exact  time  in  the  case  of  a  male  child  (in  the  case  of  a  female  it  was 
double)  was  forty  days,  during  seven  of  which  the  mother  was  to  be  accounted 
andean;  during  the  remaining  thirty-three  days  she  was  "to  continue  iii  the 
blood  of  her  purifying;  "  she  was  "  to  touch  no  hallowed  thing,  nor  come  into 
the  sanctuary,  until  the  days  of  her  purifying  be  fulfilled."  Lev.  xii.  4.  For 
further  information  see  Bilchaelis,  Law  of  Moses,  $  192,  B&hr,  Symbolik,  Vol.  ii. 
p.  48",  Winer,  mill.  Ait.  "  Beinigkeit,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  310  sq.;  and  for  a  sound 
sermon  on  the  subject,  Prank,  Si  tot.  xxii.  Vol.  i.  p.  310(A.-C.  Libr.),  and  esp. 
Hill,  inir.  Serm.  .\.\i.  p.  400.  The  indication  of  the  comparative  poverty  of 
(he  holy  Family  supplied  by  the  notice  of  their  offering  (Luke  ii.  24,  Lev.  xii.  8) 
has  often  been  observed  by  modern,  but  seldom  by  ancient,  expositors. 

7 


74  THE   BIRTII   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

But  what  a  welcome  that  was,  and  how  seemingly  at 
variance    with    all    outward    circumstances. 

Luke  ii.  2a.  m-ii  -i  i  -i        •  •        -\    cr 

The  devout,  and  let  us  add,  inspired  Simeon,1 
whose  steps  had  been  led  that  day  to  the  Temple  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,2  saw  perchance  before  him  no  more  than  two 
unnoted  worshippers.3     But   it  was  enough.     When  the 

eyes  of  the  aged  waiter  for  the  consolation 

Ver.  25. 

of  Israel   saw   the   Holy   Child,  he   saw  all. 

There  in  helpless  infancy  and  clad  in  mortal  flesh  was  the 

Lord's  Christ,  —  there  was  the  fulfilment  of 

Ver.  26.  .  . 

all  his  mystic  revelations,  the  granted  issue 

of  all  his  longings  and  all  his  prayers.4     Can  we  marvel 

that  his  whole  soul  was  stirred  to  its  depths, 

Luke  ii.  28.  ... 

that  he  took  the  Holy  Child  in  his  arms,  and 
poured  forth,  in  the  full  spirit  of  prophecy,5  that  swan-song 


1  The  history  of  this  highly  favored  man  is  completely  unknown.  Some 
recent  attempts  (Michaelis,  al.)  have  been  made  to  identify  him  with  Rabban 
Simeon,  the  son  of  llillel,  and  father  of  Gamaliel,  who  was  afterwards  president 
of  the  Sanhedrin  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  loc;  Otho,  Lex.  Rabbin,  s.  v.  "Sim- 
eon," p.  605):  such  an  identification,  however,  has  nothing  in  its  favor,  except 
the  name,  —  a  sufficiently  common  one,  and  this  against  it,  that  Kabban  Simeon 
could  not  have  been  as  old  as  the  Simeon  of  St.  Luke  is  apparently  represented 
to  be.  For  some  notices  of  Rabban  Simeon,  see  Sepp,  Leben  Christi,  ch.  xvn. 
Vol.  ii.  p.  52  sq. 

2  This  seems  implied  in  the  words  ^AiS-ej/  ev  t<£  Tlvzvixan  els  to  Up6u,  Luke 
ii.  27, —  the  preposition  with  its  case  marking  the  influence  in  which  and  under 
which  he  was  acting,  "impulsu  Spiritus  "  (Meyer,  on  Matt.  xxii.  43),  and  though 
not  perfectly  identical  with,  yet  approximating  in  force  to,  the  instrumental 
dative;  t<5  Tlvev/xari  tu>  ayiw  Kifrj^ety,  Euthyni.  in  loc.  So,  too,  Origen,  even 
more  explicitly,  —  "Spiritus  sanctus  eum  duxit  in  teniplum."  —  In  Luc.  Horn, 
xv.  Vol.  iii.  p.  949  (ed.  Bened.). 

3  One  of  the  apocryphal  writers  lias  represented  the  scene  very  differently, 
and  in  suggestive  contrast  to  the  chaste  dignity  of  the  inspired  narrative:  "Turn 
videt  ilium  Simeon  senex  instar  columns;  lucis  fulgentem,  cum  domina  Maria 
Virgo  mater  ejus  do  co  lastabunda  ulnis  suis  earn  gestaret :  circumdabant  autem 
eum  angeli  instar  circuli  celebrautes,  tanquam  satellites  regi  adstantes."  — 
Evang.  Infant.  Arab.  cap.  VI.  p.  173  (ed.  Tisch.).  The  Pseudo-Matt.  Ecang. 
keeps  more  closely  to  the  inspired  narralive.     See  cap.  xv.  p.  78. 

4  For  an  essay  on  the  character  of  this  faithful  watcher,  see  E>  ans,  Script. 
Biogr.  Vol.  i.  p.  326;  and  for  some  good  comments  on  his  inspired  canticle, 
Patritius,  dc  Ecang.  Dissert,  xxvi.  Part  III.  p.  304.  In  the  early  Church  Sim- 
eon appears  to  have  been  designated  by  the  title,  &  StoSoxos,  in  memory  of  the 
blessing  accorded  to  him.  Oonip.  Menolog.  Grac.  Feb.  3,  and  the  oration  of 
Timoth.  Ilieros.  in  the  Bibl.  Mar.  Patrum,  Vol.  v.  p.  1214. 

5  Tlpotp7]7 lk(i  x^PlTl  t tT i^-qixivos ,  Cyril  Alex.  ap.  Cramer,  Catcn.  Vol.  ii.  p.  23, 


LEOT.  n.  OP  OUR  LORD.  75 

of  the  seer  of  the  Old  Covenant,  to  which  our  Church  so 
justly  and  so  lovingly  assigns  a  place  in  its  daily  service? 
Can  we  marvel  that  with  the  Holy  Child  still  in  his  arms1 
lie  blessed  the  wondering  parents,  though  the  spirit  of 
prophecy  that  was  upon  him  mingled  with  that  blessing 
words  that  must  have  sunk  deep  into  the  heart  of  the  Vir- 
gin,- words  often  pondered  over,  yet  perchance  then  only 
fully  umlerstood,  in  all  the  mystic  bitterness  of  their  truth, 
when,  not  a  thousand  paces  from  Avhere  she  then  was 
standing,  the  nails  tore  the  hands  that  she  had  but  then 
been  holding,  and  the  spear  pierced  the  side  she  had  but 
then  been  pressing  to  her  bosom? 


and  5erm.  XV.  Vol.  i.)  p.  25  (Transl.).  On  the  character  of  this  and  the  other 
inspired  canticles  in  this  part  of  the  Scripture,  see  the  good  remarks  of  Mill,  on 
Pantht  istic  'Principles,  Part  n.  1.  3,  p.  43  sq. 

1  Though  we  cannot,  with  Meyer  and  others,  safely  press  the  meaning  of  the 
verh  K-6?rai  as  implying  '-qui  in  nlnis  meis  jaect"  (lieng.),  it  would  yet  seem 
highly  probable  from  the  context  that  this  blessing  was  pronounced  by  the  aged 
Simeon  while  still  bearing  his  Saviour  in  his  arms.  For  a  good  practical  ser- 
mon on  Simeon's  thus  receiving  our  Lord,  see  Frank,  Scrm.  xxm.  Vol.  i.  p.  360 
Bq.  (A.-C.  Libr.),  and  compare  llackct,  Scrm.  x.  p.  88  si).  (Loud.  1075). 

l'  The  prophetic  address  of  Simeon,  which  it  may  be  observed  is  directed 
specially  to  the  Virgin  {Kal  dree  irpbs  Mapiap.  rrjv  \vt\ripa.  avrov,  Luke  ii.  34),  has 
two  separate  references,  the  one  general,  to  the  Jewish  nation,  and  the  opposed 
spiritual  attitudes  into  which  the  Gospel  of  Christ  would  respectively  bring 
those  who  believed  and  those  who  rejected  (muffiv  /ueV,  tSiv  fxr)  ttktt 61/oVt cof , 
avaoracriv  8e,  ruv  TricrTtv6i'Ta>v,  Theophylact) ;  the  other  special;  to  the  Virgin 
personally  (>cal  gov  8e  avrTjs  k.  r.  A.,  ver.  35),  and  to  the  bitterness  of  agony 
with  which  she  should  hereafter  behold  the  sufferings  of  her  divine  .Son.  So 
lightly  Enthymius:  l>on<pa'iav  8e  wi>6i*acre  ti]v  TyUTjTntairaT-nc  taxi  o^uav  bSvvqv, 
ifTis  oirjAde  t^v  KapSlav  TTJS  &eo/x7]Topos,  ore  6  vlbs  avrr/s  TrpucTrjAai^r)  r<3 
aravpy.  Compare  also  a  good  comment  in  Cramer,  Caten.  Vol.  ii.  p.  24.  and 
Mill,  Univ.  Serm.  XXI.  p.  415.  The  only  remaining  exegetieal  difficulty  is  the 
connection  of  the  final  clause,  ottoos  hf  k.  t.  A.  (ver.  35).  According  to  the 
ordinary  punctuation,  this  would  be  dependent  on  ver.  34,  the  first  clause  of 
ver.  85  being  enclosed  in  a  parenthesis;  according,  however,  to  the  best  modern 
interpreters,  it  is  regarded  as  simply  dependent  on  what  precedes:  the  mystery, 
that  the  heart  of  the  earthly  mother  was  to  be  riven  with  agony  at  the  Bufferings 
Of  her  divine  Son,  involved  as  its  end  and  object  the  bringing  out  of  the  true 
Characters  and  thoughts  of  men,  and  making  it  clear  and  manifest  —  ris  fief  6 
ayairwi/ a:ntU>,  Ka)  /xfXP1  Sai'drov  ttjv  (Is  avrhv  a.y6.iri]v  iv^(^KVv|J.fvos•  Ti's  5e 
<S  tiritrkutTT o'j  €\w  ryv  els  ablhv  iriffTlV,  ffKavBdKov  irAripwdels  5ta  Tor  arav- 
p6v.  Cramer,  Caten.  Vol.  ii.  p.  25.  So  Augustine,  in  his  answer  to  the  queries 
of  Paulinua  of  Nolo  [Epist.  cxlix.88,  Vol.  ii.  p.  014,  ed.  Hign6),  except  that  he 
unduly  limits  the  ttjWwi'  KapSiwu  SiaKoytafiol  to  the  "  insidis  Judeeorum  et 
discipuloruni  iufirmitas." 


76  THE   BIKTH  AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

Yet  man  was  not  alone  to  welcome  the  Lord  ;  one  sex 

was    not    alone    to    greet    Him,   in    whom 

Gai.iu.28.  there   was   neither  male   nor  female,  but  all 

Luke i. as.  were  one.     Not  one  sex  only,  for  at  that  very 

instant,  we  are  told  by  St.  Luke,  the  aged 

and  tenderly-faithful  Anna1  enters  the  place  she  loved  so 

well.     Custom  rather  than  revelation  appears 

Ver.37.  .  '  L 

to  have  brought  the  widowed  prophetess 
into  the  temple,  but  she  too  saw  and  believed,  and  returned 
grateful  praise2  unto  the  God  of  her  fathers;  and  of  her 
this  special  notice  has  been  made  by  the  Evangelist,  that 

"  she  spake  of  the  Lord   to    all    them   that 

Luke  ii.  38.  .  „ 

were  looking  for  redemption  in  Jerusalem." 
The  daughter  of  Phanuel3  was  the  first  preacher  of  Christ 
in  the  city  of  the  Great  King. 

And  her  preaching  was  not  long  left  unconfirmed. 
What  she  was  now  telling  in  secret  chambers4  was  soon 
to  be  proclaimed  on  the  house-tops.  The  ends  of  the 
earth  were  already  sending  forth  the  heralds  of  the  new- 

1  The  tenderness  and  constancy  of  the  aged  prophetess  to  the  memory  of  the 
husband  of  her  youth  is  slightly  enhanced  by  the  reading  of  Lachmann  and 
Teschendorf,  —  xhpa  *  u  s  tr&v  by'So^novra  Tecradpwi',  Luke  ii.  37;  but  this 
reading,  though  supported  by  A,  B,  L,  the  Vulgate,  and  other  versions,  is  by 
no  means  certain.  The  honor  in  which  the  "  univira  "  was  held  by  the  Jews,  is 
shown  very  distinctly  by  the  comments  of  Josephus  on  the  persistent  widow- 
hood of  Antonia:  Antiq.  xviii.  6.  6.  Compare  Winer,  R  WB.  Art.  "Ehe," 
Vol.  i.  p.  299. 

2  This  perhaps  is  a  fairly  correct  paraphrase  of  the  peculiar  term  used  by  St. 
Luke,  avbwp.oKoyii'TO.  The  remarks  of  the  accurate  Winer  on  this  word  are  as 
follows:  "Possis  existimare  de  celebrandi laudandique  signiflcatione;  .  .  .  sed,  ut 
dicam  quod  sentio,  addendum  erat,  celebrantis  istius  pietatcm  mulieris  maxime 
ill  grataritnn  aetione  positam  esse.  .  .  .  Itaque  luce  videtur  verbi  avSofxoXoy  vis 
propria  esse,  avrl  enim  manifesto  referendi  rependendique  sen  sum  habet,  atque 
ita  facile  perspicias,  quod  inter  o/xoKoy.  &ecS  et  ai>5ofxo\oy.  0eaS  intersit."  —  De 
Verb.  c.  Prcep.  Fasc.  in.  p.  20,  —  a  treatise  unfortunately  never  completed. 

3  The  special  mention  of  the  father  and  tribe  of  Anna  was  perhaps  designed 
to  give  to  the  narrative  a  still  further  stamp  of  historical  truth.  Anna,  the 
daughter  of  Phanuel,  might  have  been  a  name  still  remembered  by  many: 
iirifxivei  6  tvayy^KiVT-qs  rij  irepl  ttjs  "Awr)S  a(pyiyii<rei,  Ka\  rbi/  Trarepa  kcl\  t))v 
(/>uAiV  KaraXeyccf,  "fa  /j.d&cv/j.ei'  orj  a\r)drj  \eyai,  papTvpas  waavel  iroWovs 
■7rpo(TKa\oviAei>os.     Theoph.  in  loo. 

4  Anna's  preaohing  was  not  general,  but  rots  irpoff^exofxevois  \vrpeofftv  fv 
'ItpovaaXriix,  ver.  38.  The  local  addition  iv  'lepovcr.  appears  to  belong  specially 
to  the  participle  rails  Trpo(x8£X0M€'I'0,s>    See  Meyer  *'it  he. 


Leot.il  of  our  lord.  77 

born  King.     The  feet  of  strange  pilgrims  and  worshippers 
were  even  now  on  the  mountains  of  the  Promised  Land. 

It  would  seem  from  the  narrative  that  Joseph  and  Mary- 
had  returned  but  a  i'aw  days  l  to  their  tem- 
porary  abode    at   Bethlehem,2   when    sap;es,       7]'e  •''■"' /""' /"'- 

l  J  '  o       '      oration  oj  the  Mayi. 

bearing  the  already  almost  generic  name  of 
Magi,  arrive  from  some  Eastern  lands  not  specified  by  the 
Evangelist,  but  probably  remote  as  the  Arabia  which  one 
ancient  tradition,3  or  the   Persia   which   another  ancient 
tradition,4  has  fixed  upon  as  their  home.     Witnesses  were 


1  According  to  one  MS.  of  the  Pseudo-Matt.  Evangelium  (cap.  xvi.  p.  79,  ed. 
Tisch.),  two  days  afterwards;  according  to  the  text  adopted  by  Teschendorf,  the 
completely  improbable  period  of  two  years.  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  I.  2, 
p.  59,  note,  who,  however,  himself  (see  below,  p.  73,  note  1)  seems  to  press  too 
strongly  the  with  Stfrovs  Ka\  Karuntpu,  Matt.  ii.  16.  The  Protev.  Jacobi  (cap. 
xxi.)  makes  the  visit  of  the  Magi  to  have  been  made  to  the  Holy  Family  while 
yet  in  the  cave,  a  statement  distinctly  at  variance  with  Matt.  ii.  11,  «A&<W«s  els 
T7jj/  o'tKiav.  For  chronological  considerations  substantiating  the  view  taken  in 
the  text,  see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  154  sq. 

2  The  narratives  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  have  been  here  often  regarded 
as  almost  wholly  irreconcilable.  See  Meyer  and  Alford  in  loc.  Is  this  however 
so  certain?  Why  may  not  St.  Luke  have  studiously  omitted  what  he  might  pos- 
sibly have  known  had  been  recorded  by  another  Evangelist,  and  thus  have  left 
unnoticed  the  occurrences  which  intervened  between  this  visit  to  the  Temple 
and  the  return  to  Nazareth,  specified  by  St.  Matthew,  ch.  ii.  23?  The  reconcilia- 
tion adopted  by  Eusebius  (Qucest.  ad  Marin,  ap.  Mai,  Bibl.  Patr.  Vol.  iv.  p.  253), 
that  Joseph  and  Mary  went  direct  to  Nazareth,  and  afterwards  returned  to 
Bethlehem,  is  not  very  probable,  as  no  reason  can  be  assigned  why  the  Holy 
Family  should  have  returned  again  to  a  place  with  which  they  appear  to  have 
little  or  no  connection.  See  Augustine,  de  Consensu  Evang.  II.  5.  16,  Vol.  iii. 
p.  1079  (ed.  Migne),  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  p.  156. 

3  Such  is  the  older  tradition,  noticed  and  supported  by  Justin  Martyr,  Tryph. 
cap.  78.  Vol.  ii.  p.  263  (ed.  Otto),  Tertullian,  adv.  Jud.  cap.  9,  and  adv.  Marc.  ill. 
13.  The  objection  to  this  view  seems  to  be  the  term  avaroXuiv,  which,  in  the 
New  Testament  at  least,  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  a  natural  designation  of  a 
country  which  elsewhere  is  always  specified  by  its  regular  geographical  name. 
gee  Winer.  HWJS.  Art.  "  Stern  der  Wciscn."  Vol.  ii.  p.  523,  but  also  contrast  the 
reff.  of  1'atritius,  de  Evang.  Dissert,  xxvu.  Part  in.  317. 

4  This  somewhat  later  t  radii  ion  is  maintained  by  Chrysostom  (in  loc),  Pseudo- 
BaaU  (Vol.  ii.  865,  ed.  Bened.),  Ephrem  (Cantic  de  Maria  et  Magis,  Vol.  iii.  p. 
601,  ed.  Assem.),  the  Christian  poel  Juvencus,  and  many  other  ancient  writers, 
and  with  considerable  probability,  as  Persia  and  the  adjoining  countries  appear 
always  to  have  been  regarded  as  the  chief  seat  of  the  Magian  philosophy  (see 
the  numerous  confirmatory  nil',  in  Greswell,  Dissert,  xvni.),  and  as  the  term 
at  avaroAai  mighl  naturally  and  suitably  have  been  applied  by  the  Evangelist  to 
the  trans-Eupbratean  countries  of  which  Persia  formed  a  portion.  Such,  too,  is 
tin-  opinion  of  apparently  the  majority  of  the  more  learned  modern  writers  who 


78  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

they,  from  whatever  clime  they  came,  of  the  wisdom  of 
God  displaying  itself  in  the  foolishness  or  misconceptions 
of  man.1  Witnesses  were  they  of  the  cherished  longings 
of  ancient  nations;2  bright  examples  of  a  faith  that  could 
dignify  even  superstitions,  and  of  hopes  that  grew  not 
cold  when  all  must  have  seemed  utter  hopelessness. 

But  what  could  have  brought  these  first-fruits  of  the 
wisdom  of  the  Eastern  world  from  their  own 
distant  lands?  Even  that  which  was  most  cal- 
culated to  work  in  them  the  liveliest  belief  and  conviction. 
A  new  star,3  which  the  tenor  of  the  narrative  wholly  pre- 

have  touched  upon  this  subject ;  we  may  pause  to  specify  the  celebrated  Orientalist, 
Hyde  (de  Relig.  Vet.  Pers.  cap.  xxxi.  383),  who  particularly  notices  their  country 
as  Parthia ;  the  learned  Dr.  Thomas  Jackson  ( Creed,  Book  vn.  Vol.  vi.  p.  261,  Oxf. 
1844),  and  the  no  less  learned  Dr.  Mill  ( Obs.  on  Pantheistic  Principles,  Part  n. 
pp.  365,  375).  For  further  information  the  student  may  be  referred  to  Spanheim, 
Dub.  Evang.  xvm. — xxiv.  Part  n.  p.  255  sq.,  the  excellent  Dissertation  of 
Patritius  above  referred  to  (de  Evangeliis,  Part  in.  pp.  309 — 354,  where  every 
question  relating  to  these  sages  is  fully  discussed),  Greswell,  Dissert,  xvm.  Vol. 
ii.  p.  135  sq.,  Hoffmann,  Leben  Jesu,  p.  125,  and  especially  the  sound  and  valua- 
ble comments  of  Mill,  on  Panth.  Princ.  Part  II.  3.  1,  p.  364. 

1  See  the  excellent  remarks  of  Mill  on  the  true  physical  influence  and  true 
significancy  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  and  the  counterfeit  science  of  astrology 
with  which  it  was  adulterated.  —  Observations  on  Pantheistic  Principles,  Part  u. 
3  2,  pp.  364,  365.  Compare  also  a  learned  and  not  uninteresting  dissertation  on 
judicial  astrology  in  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  xxxiii.  Part  n.  p.  334  sq. 

2  It  has  long  been  a  matter  of  discussion  what  precisely  led  these  Magi  to 
expect  a  birth  so  prefigured.  See  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  xxxiv.  Part  u.  p. 
366  sq.  Was  it  due  to  a  carefully  preserved  knowledge  of  the  prophecy  of 
Balaam  (Numb.  xxiv.  17 — 19),  an  opinion  maintained  by  Origen  (contr.  Cels. 
Book  i.  p  46,  ed.  Spencer),  and  the  majority  of  the  ancient  expositors;  or  was  it 
due  to  prophecies  uttered  in  their  own  country,  dimly  foreshadowing  this  divine 
mystery  (see  the  citations  from  the  Zend-Avesta,  below,  p.  77,  note  1,  and  com- 
pare Hyde,  de  Relig.  Pers.  xxxi.  p.  389  sq.)?  Perhaps  the  latter  view  is  the 
most  probable,  especially  if  we  associate  with  it  a  belief,  which  the  sacred  narra- 
tive gives  us  every  reason  for  entertaining  (Matt.  ii.  12),  that  these  faithful  men 
received  a  special  illumination  both  to  apply  rightly  what  they  had  remem- 
bered, and  to  recognize  its  verification  in  the  phenomenon  of  which  they  were 
now  the  privileged  observers.    Compare  Mill,  Observations,  Tart  n.  3.  2,  p.  368. 

3  Thus  far,  at  least,  correctly,  Origen  (contr.  Cels.  Book  i.  p.  45,  ed.  Spencer): 
Tbu  6tf>&ei/Ta  acTTffia  iu  rfj  a.varo\rj  k  olivov  elvai  i>o/u.i£ofAev  ical  /j.  -n  5  e  v  \ 
t  oiv  avvh&oov  it  ap  a.-K  \y\  a  to  v  ovre  toiv  iv  rfj  airAavel  ovre  tG>v  <  v  reus 
KaTWTipu  <r<paipais.  This  great  writer  seems  only  to  err  when  in  his  subsequent 
remarks  he  supposes  it  to  be  of  the  nature  of  a  comet.  On  this  star  much,  and 
that  not  always  of  a  satisfactory  nature,  has  been  written  by  both  ancient  and 
modern  commentators.  That  it  was  not  a  star  in  the  usual  astronomical  sense 
(Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  I.  2,  p.  59)  seems  c!ear  from  the  special  motions  appar- 


Lect.  II.  or   OUR  LORD,  79 

eludes  our  deeming  aught  else  than  a  veritable  heavenly 
body  moving  apparently  in  the  limits  of  our  own  atmos- 
phere, and  subject  not  to  astronomical,  but  to  special  and 

fore-ordered  laws,  had  suddenly  beamed,  not  many  months 
before,1  upon  the  eyes  of  these  watchers  in  their  own  East- 
ern lands,- and,  either  by  cooperating  with  dormant  proph- 
ecy or  deep-seated  expectation,  leads  them  to  that  land, 
with  which  either  their  own  science,3  or,  more  probably,  the 

cntly  attributed  to  it  in  the  sacred  narrative  (see  Mill,  on  Panth.  Prime.  Tart  XL. 
3.  2,  p.  309,  note);  that  it  also  could  not  be  a  mere  conjunction  of  the  greater 
planets  (Milliter,  Stern  </<  r  fFiesen,  Eeppler,  and  similarly  Ideler,  Handbuch  der 
Chronol.  Vol.  ii.  p  399  sq.,  —  both  following  or  expanding  the  older  view  of 
Keppler)  seems  also  still  more  certain  from  the  use  of  the  definite  term  affr-^p. 
We  therefore  justly  fall  back  upon  the  ancient  opinion,  that  it  was  a  luminous 
body,  possibly  of  a  meteoric  nature,  but  subject  to  special  laws  regulating  its 
appearance  and  perhaps  also  its  motion.  The  literature  of  the  subject,  which  is 
very  extensive,  will  be  found  in  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Stern  der  Wieseu,"  Vol.  ii. 
p.  523  sq. 

1  The  date  of  the  appearance  of  the  star  is  a  question  that  lias  been  often 
entertained,  and  cannot  easily  be  decided.  Wieselcr  (Chron.  Synops.  I.  2,  p.  59) 
urges  a  period  of  two  years  previous  to  the  arrival  of  the  Magi,  pressing  the  sort 
oT  date  afforded  by  Matt.  ii.  16.  See  above,  p.  77.  As,  however,  Greswell  (Dis- 
8i  rt.  xvm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  136,  ed.  2)  has  fairly  shown  that  the  term  curb  Sterovs  Ka\ 
Kcnoorepw  need  not  be  understood  as  necessarily  implying  the  extreme  limit,  and 
a<  it  is  also  probable  that  Herod  would  be  certain  to  secure  to  himself  a  wide 
margin,  we  may,  with  almost  equal  plausibility,  select  any  period  between  thir- 
teen and  twenty-four  months.  Patritius  (tie  Evanrj.  Dissert,  xxvil.  Tart  ill.  p. 
334)  urges,  with  a  little  show  of  probability,  a  period  of  eighteen  months,  which, 
according  to  the  rough  date  of  the  Nativity  adopted  in  these  lectures,  would 
hare  to  be  reduced  to  sixteen.  The  time  of  the  miraculous  conception  seems  to 
commend  itself  as  the  exact  epoch,  but  causes  us  either  to  reduce  somewhat 
unduly  the  curb  Sierovs,  or  (with  Greswell)  to  assume  an  interval  of  nearly  three 
months  between  the  Presentation  and  the  arrival  of  the  Magi,  which  is  not  only 
improbable  in  itself,  but  absolutely  incompatible  with  the  date,  (a.  u.  c.  750,  the 
death-year  of  Herod),  which  we  have  above  fixed  upon  as  the  probable  year  of 
the  Nativity.     See  p.  77,  note  1. 

2  A  tiw  interpreters  of  this  passage,  and  among  them  our  own  expositor 
Hammond  (on  Malt.  ii.  2)  and  the  German  chronologer  Wieseler  [Synops.  p.  59), 
regard  iv  "rfj  avaroKi}  as  used  with  an  astronomical  reference,  "at  its  rising/' 
This  seems  at  needless  variance  with  the  use  of  the  same  words  in  ver.  9,  where 
iv  ttj  acaroAjJ  and  ob  ?jv  rb  ircuftiov  seem  to  stand  in  a  kind  of  local  antithesis, 
and  is  in  opposition  to  the  apparently  unanimous  opinion  of  the  Vulgate,  Syriac, 
Coptic,  and  other  ancient  versions.  For  yet  another  view  see  Jactcson,  Creed, 
Booh  vii.  Vol.  vi.  p.262(Oxf.  1844). 

3  Much  has  been  said  about  the  astrological  association  of  the  constellation  of 

the  Fish  wilh  the  land  of  JudSSa.     See  Mulder,  SI,  rn  </,  r  WieSi  ,i.  p.  66  sq.,  Ideler, 

Handb.  der  Chronol.  Vol.  ii.  p.  409,  and  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  i. '-'.  p.  66.  As, 
however,  this  is  more  or  less  associated  with  the  doubtful  virus  as  to  the  nature 

of  the  star  above  alluded  to,  we  make  no  use  ol'  such  precarious  elucidation.-. 


80  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  IL 

whole  feeling  of  the  Eastern  Avorld,1  tended  to  associate 
the  mystery  of  the  future.  Can  we  not  picture  to  our- 
selves the  excitement  and  amazement  in  Jerusalem,  as 
those  travel-stained  men2  entered  into  the  city  of  David 
with  the  one  question3  on  their  lips,  "Where  is  he  that  is 
born   King  of  the  Jews?"  Can  we  wonder 

Matt*  U.  2.  i  1  ..  .., 

that  the  aged  man   still  on  the   throne  of 
Judaea  was  filled  with  strange  trouble  and 

perplexity?     Can  we  be  surprised  at  the  course  that  was 

immediately  followed? 

Let  us  only  consider  the  case  in  its  sim- 

The  extreme  nat-  " 

wainess  of  the  sa-     plest  aspects.      Here  was  a  question  based 

cred  narrative.  ,  1 

on    celestial   appearances  coming   from    the 
lips  of  those  in  Avhom  it  would  have  seemed  most  porten- 

1  This  general  feeling  has  been  above  alluded  to.  See  p.  55,  note  2,  and  com- 
pare Mill,  on  Panth.  Princ.  Part  n.  3. 1,  p.  366. 

2  Some  interesting  notices  of  the  probable  time  which  it  would  have  taken  the 
Wise  Men  to  travel  from  Persia  to  Jerusalem  will  be  found  in  Greswell,  Dissert. 
xvm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  13S  sq.  From  the  calculations  there  made  it  would  appear  that 
they  could  not  have  been  much  less  than  four  months  on  the  road.  It  has  been 
computed  by  Chrysostom,  in  reference  to  the  journey  of  Abraham,  that  the  time 
occupied  in  a  journey  from  Palestine  no  further  than  Chaldasa  would  be  about 
70  days.    Ad  Stagir.  n.  Vol.  i.  p.  188  (cited  by  Greswell). 

3  The  terms  of  this  question  deserve  some  notice,  as  they  serve  incidentally  to 
show  the  firm  belief  of  the  Magi  that  the  expected  King  was  now  really  born 
into  the  world,  and  yet  their  complete  ignorance,  not  only  of  the  place  of  Ilis 
birth,  but,  as  it  would  seem,  also  of  its  mysterious  nature  and  character.  Comp. 
Greswell,  Harmony,  Dissert,  xvm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  144,  but  see  contra  Theoph.  in  loc. 
They  go  naturally  to  Jerusalem,  for  where,  as  Jackson  says  (Creed,  Book  vn.  p. 
258),  "should  they  seek  the  King  of  the  Jews  but  in  His  standing  court?  "  and 
they  put  forward  a  question  which  shows  their  conviction  that  a  great  King  had 
been  born  in  the  land  they  were  visiting,  though,  at  present,  who  or  where 
they  knew  not  (opposed  to  Theoph.  in  loc).  In  the  sequel,  they  were  probably 
permitted  to  behold  some  glimpses  of  the  true  nature  of  Him  whom  they  came  to 
reverence ;  so  that,  as  Bp.  Taylor  well  says, <;  their  custom  was  changed  to  grace, 
and  their  learning  heightened  with  inspiration;  and  God  crowned  all  with  a 
spiritual  and  glorious  event."  —  Life  of  Christ,  Part  I.  4.  4.  Though  then  in  the 
first  irpocxKvvritjui  (ver.  2)  no  more  perhaps  might  have  been  designed  than  the 
outward  worshipful  reverence  of  Persian  usage  (Herod.  I.  134),  we  may  well 
believe  that  in  the  subsequent  performance  of  the  act  (ver.  11)  there  was  some- 
thing more,  and  may  not  incorrectly  believe  with  Tertullian  [adv.  Jud.  cap.  9), 
Origen  (contr.  Celsum,  Lib.  I.  p.  46,  ed.  Spencer),  and  indeed  the  whole  early 
Chinch,  that  with  a  deepening  though  imperfect  consciousness  these  faithful 
men  adored  the  Infant  at  Bethlehem  as  God,  no  less  than  they  prostrated  them- 
selves before  Him  as  man.  See  the  copious  reff.  in  Patritius,  de  Evany.  Dissert. 
xxvii.  2,  Part  in,  p.  348. 


LECT.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  81 

tons,  —  the  Magi  of  the  East,  the  ancient  watchers  of  the 
stars.     When  with  this  we  remember  how  rife  expectation 
was,  and  how  one  perhaps  of  that  very  council,  which  the 
dying  king1  called  together,  could  tell  of  his  own  father's 
mysterious  prophecy  of  the  coming  Messiah2 — when  we 
add  to  this  the  strange  rnmors  of  the  Child  of  Bethlehem, 
fast  Hying  from  mouth  to  mouth  beyond  that  narrow  circle 
to  which  Anna  had  first  proclaimed  Him,  —  can  we  won- 
der at  all  that  followed?     How  natural  the  description  of 
the  probably  hastily-summoned  council,  and  of  the  ques- 
tion  publicly  propounded  to   it  touching  the  birth-place 
of  the  Messiah.     How  natural,  too,  the  pri- 
vate inquiry  about  the  star's  appearance  made 
specially  to  the  Magi,  and  how  accordant  with 
all  that  we  know  of  Herod,  the  frightful  hypocrisy  with 
which  they  were  sent  to  test  and  verify  the  now  ascertained 
declaration  of  prophecy,  and  the  murderous 
sequel.     How  natural,  also,  the  description  of 
the    further  journey  of  the  Wise   Men,  their  simple  joy 

1  The  death  of  Herod  appears  almost  certainly  to  have  taken  place  a  few  days 
before  the  Fassovcr  of  the  year  A.  u.  C.  750;  apparently,  if  retrospective  calcu- 
lations can  be  depended  on,  towards  the  end  of  the  first  week  of  April.  See 
Wieseler,  Ckron.  Syn.  p.  57,  and  compare  Clinton,  Fasti  Hull.  Vol.  iii.  p.  254, 
Browne,  Ordo  Sac.  §  31,  p.  31.  If,  then,  we  suppose  the  Saviour's  birth  to 
have  been  in  late  winter,  say,  at  the  beginning  of  February,  the  arrival  of  the 
Magi  would  have  taken  place  about  three  weeks  before  Herod's  death,  and  a 
very  lew  days  before  his  removal  to  the  baths  at  Callirrhoe  (Joseph.  Antiq. 
xvn.  li.  5).  Comp.  Browne,  Ordo  Scec.  §  28.  If  we  adopt  Dec.  25,  a.  u.  c.  749,  a 
dale  which,  as  has  been  above  implied  (p.  70,  note  3)  is  perhaps  not  quite  so 
probable  (compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Syn.  p.  134  so,.),  the  interval  between  the 
present  event  and  the  deatli  of  the  wretched  king  will  be  proportionately  longer, 
and  in  some  respects,  it  must  be  admitted,  more  chronologically  convenient. 

-'  If,  as  seems  reasonable  to  Suppose,  the  son  of  It.  Keliuiniah  hen  Hakkana 
was  present  at  the  council,  he  could  scarcely  have  forgotten  the  prophecy  said 
to  have  been  uttered  by  his  father,  — that  the  coining  of  the  Messiah  could  not 
he  delayed  more  than  fifteen  years.  See  Sepp,  I,,h,  n  chrisfi,  Vol.  ii.  p.  24,  and 
the  curious  work  of  Petrus  Galatinus,  de  dreanis  Cathol.  Ferit.  cap.  3,  p.  8 
(Francof.  1602).  The  opinion  that  this  was  a  special  meeting  of  the  Sanhedrin 
(Lightfoot)  is  perhaps  slightly  the  most  probable;  the  omission  of  the  third 
element,  the  Ttpeof&inepoi  rod  \aov,  is  similarly  found  in  Matt.  xvi.  21,  xx.  18. 
See  Meyer  in  loc.  On  the  ypajxucnus  rou  Aaov  here  mentioned,  see  Spanheim, 
Hull.  Evang.  xxxvm.  Part  n.  p.  892  sq.,  Patritius,  de Evcmg.  Dissert,  \.\ix. 
Part  in.  p.  S36,  and  on  the  Sanhedrin  generally,  Selden,  de  Synedriis,  n.  ti.  Vol. 
ii.  p.  1816  .-<[.  .lost,  Gesch.  dvs  Judenth,  ii.  3. 14,  Vol.  i.  p.  273. 


82  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

when,  on  their  evening  mission  to  Bethlehem,  they  again 
see1  the  well-remembered  star,  and  find  that 

Ver.  9. 

the  very  powers  of  the  heavens  are  leading 
them  where  Iiabbinieal  wisdom2  had  already  sent  them. 
How  full  must  now  have  been  their  conviction ;  with  what 
opening  hearts  must  they  have  worshipped  ;  with  what  holy 

joy  must  they  have  spread  out  their  costly 

Matt.  ii.  II.  .  „  .  .  „ 

guts;  how  they  must  now  have  felt,  though 
perhaps  still  dimly  and  imperfectly,  that  they  were  kneel- 
ing before  the  hope  of  a  world,  —  One  greater  than  Zoro- 
aster had  ever  foretold,  a  truer  Redeemer  than  the  Sosiosh 
of  their  own  ancient  creed.3  No  marvel  was 
it,  that  with  prompt  obedience  they  fol- 
lowed the  guidance  of  the  visions  of  the  night,  and  re- 

1  This  seems  the  only  natural  meaning  that  wo  can  assign  to  the  words  Ka\  ISov 
[surely  an  expression  marking  the  unexpectedness  of  the  reappearance],  6  aarrip 
%v  elSov  iv  rfj  ava.To\rj  ivpoiiyei/  avrovs,  Matt.  ii.  9.  Whether  the  star  preceded 
them  the  whole  way  to  Jerusalem,  and  then  disappeared  for  a  short  time,  or 
whether  it  only  appeared  to  them  in  their  own  country,  disappeared,  and  now 
reappeared,  must  remain  a  matter  of  opinion.  The  definitive  t>u  eiSov  iv  t  fj 
avcvrohfi.  and  still  more  the  unusual  strength  of  the  expression  which  describes 
their  joy  at  again  beholding  the  star,  —  e'x«Pr)°'a"  xaP°-v  fJ-fjdh-y  crcpoSpa  (ver. 
10),  —  seem  strongly  in  favor  of  the  latter  view.  So  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang. 
xxix.  Part  ii.  p.  320,  Jackson,  Creed,  Book  vn.  Vol.  vi.  p.  201,  and  Mill,  Obser- 
vations, II.  2.  3,  p.  3G9. 

2  The  recent  revival  of  the  older  anti-christian  view,  that  the  prophecy  of 
Micah  (oh.  v.  2)  cited,  by  the  Evangelist,  either  refers  to  Zorobabel  (a  view 
unhappily  maintained  by  Theodoras  of  Mopsuestia),  or,  if  referring  to  the  Mes- 
siah, only  alludes  to  His  descent  from  David,  whose  seat  Bethlehem  was,  has 
been  ably  and  completely  disposed  of  by  Mill,  Observations,  n.  2.  3,  pp.  391 — 
402.  On  this  and  other  supposed  difficulties  connected  with  this  prophecy,  see 
Spanheim,  Bub.  Evang.  xli.-xlvi.  Part  II.  p.  406;  Patritius,  de  Evang.  Dis- 
sert, xxx.  Part  in.  p.  368  sq. 

3  According  to  the  statements  of  Anquotil  dn  Perron,  in  his  Life  of  Zoroaster, 
prefixed  to  his  edition  of  the  Zend-Avesta  (Vol.  i.  2,  p.  46),  Sosiosh  was  the  last  of 
the  three  posthumous  sons  of  Zoroaster,  and  was  to  raise  and  judge  the  dead  and 
renovate  the  earth.  See  lescbts  Sades,  xxvm.,  "  Lorsque  Sosiosch  paroitra.il 
ilia  du  bien  au  monde  entier  existaut"  (Vol.  ii.  p.  278);  Boundehesch,  xxxi., 
"  Sosiosch  fera  revivre  les  morts"  (Vol.  ii.  p.  411);  and  similarly,  ib.  xi.  (Vol.  ii. 
p.  3IJ4);  ib.  xxxin.  (Vol.  ii.  p.  420).  Whatever  may  be  the  faults  or  inaccuracies 
of  Du  Pen  on's  translation  (many  of  which  have  been  noticed  in  Burnof's  Com- 
mentaire  stir  le  Yarna,  Paris  1S33),  it  can  at  any  rate  now  no  longer  be  doubted 
that  Zend  has  its  proper  place  among  the  primitive  languages  of  the  Indo-Ger- 
manic  family  (see  Rask's  Essay,  translated  by  Von  dor  Hagen,  Berl.  182(i),  and 
that  the  Avesta  must  have  existed  in  writing  previously  to  the  time  of  Alexan- 
der.    See  Donaldson,  New  Cratylus,  §  80,  p.  144  sq.  (ed.  3> 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  83 

turned  to  their  distant   home  by  a  way  by  which  they 
came  not. 

No  sooner  had  they  departed,  than  the  heavenly  warn- 
ing is  sent  to  Joseph1  to  flee  on  that  very 
night-  into  xLigypt  from  the  coming  wrath  oi      a,„i  murder  of  the 
Herod.     And  that  wrath  did  not  long  linger. 

°  &  IVr.  13. 

When  the  savage  king  found  that  his  strange 
messengers  had  deceived  him,  with  the  broad  margin  that 
a  reckless  ferocity  left  a  matter  of  no  moment,  he  slays 
every  male  child  in  Bethlehem,  whose  age  could  in  any  way 
have  accorded  with  the  rough  date  which  the  first  appear- 
ance of  the  star  had  been  judged  to  supply.3 

On  this  fiendish  act  we  need  dwell  no  fur-     ,  The,  "k',cc  of 

Josepnus. 

ther,  save  to  protest  against  the  inferences 
that   have  been   drawn  from  the  silence  of  a  contempo- 
rary historian.4     "What,  we  may  fairly  ask,  was  such  an 


1  Again,  it  will  be  observed,  consistently  with  tbo  notice  of  the  preceding 
divine  communication  vouchsafed  to  Joseph  (Mutt.  i.  20),  —  by  an  angelic  visita- 
tion in  :i  ilr,  mil.  Sec  again  ver  20,  and  compare  the  remarks  made  above,  p.  1.5, 
iiolc  1.  Some  curious  remarks  on  the  nature  of  angelic  visitations  in  dreams 
will  be  (bund  in  the  learned  work  of  Bynaeus,  de  Natali  Jes.  Chr.  i.  2. 14,  p.  210. 

-  Probably  on  the  same  night  that  the  Magi  arrived;  for  there  seems  every 
reason  againsl  the  view  of  a  commentator  in  Cramer  (Catrn.  Vol.  i.  p.  14),  that 
the  star  led  th.  in  iv  ri/J-epa  fxetrp.  At  any  rate  the  Holy  Family  appear  to  have 
departed  by  night:  the  words,  iyepdeh  irapdhafie,  seem  to  enjoin  all  prompti- 
tude,—  "surge  accipe,"  Syr. 

8  See  above,  p.  7'J,  note  1.  As  Ilerod  made  his  savage  edict  inclusive  as  regards 
locality  (iv  BTj^Aee/i  /col  iv  -Kaatv  tois  opiois  avT?is,  ver.  16),  so  did  he  also  in 
reference  to  time:  he  killed  all  the  children  of  two  \  ears  and  under  (airb  Sictovs, 
Bcil.  iccuios,  not.  xp^vov,  as  apparently  Vulg.,  "a  bimatu"),  to  make  sure  that 
he  included  therein  the  Divine  Infant  of  Bethlehem;  tovs  ixkv  Sie-reTs  avaipu, 
%va  ex7?  TAaros  6  xp&vos-    Euthym.  on  Matt.  ii.  lo,  i>.  si  (ed.  Matth.-vi). 

<  It  seems  doubtful  whether  we  need  go  so  far  as  to  say,  with  Dr.  Mill  (Ob.<<r- 
mti.'iis,  ii.  3. 1,  p.  :ji"i),  that  this  silence  is  remarkable.  The  concluding  days  of 
Herod's  life  were  marked  by  such  an  accumulation  of  barbarities  that  such  an 
event  might  easily  have  been  overlooked  or  forgotten.  At  any  rate  the  refer- 
ence of  the  well-known  passage  Of  Macrnbius  (Satumal.  II.  4)  to  this  murder  of 
the  Innocents,  though  often  denied  or  explained  away  Cans  der  Christliehen 
Tradition  gerloBsen  ist,"  Meyer,  Kommentar.  p.  80),  seems  now  clearly  established 
and  vindicated.  See  Mill,  Hi.  p.  849  BO,.;  and  compare  Spanheim.  liuh.  /.run;/ 
i.xxvi.  Pari  ii.  p  534  sq.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  if,  as  seems  nearly  certain, 
the  son  of  Herod  alluded  to  in  that  passage  was  Antipater,  the  date  of  the  mur- 
der of  the  Innocents  may  be  roughly  fixed  aenotverj  tar  distant  from  that  of 
the  execution  of  the  unhappy  man  referred  to,  and  this  latter  event,  we  know, 


84  THE   BIRTH  AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

act  in  the  history  of  a  monster  whose  hand  reeked  with 
the  blood  of  whole  families  and  of  his  nearest  and  dearest 
relations?  What  was  the  murder  of  a  few  children  at  Beth- 
lehem in  the  dark  history  of  one  who  had,  perchance  but 
a  few  days  before,  burnt  alive  at  Jerusalem  above  forty 
hapless  zealots  who  had  torn  down  his  golden  eagle?1 
What  was  the  lamentation  at  Rama2  compared  with  that 
which  had  been  heard  in  that  monster's  own  palace,  and 
which,  if  his  inhuman  orders  had  been  executed,  would 
have  been  soon  heard  in  every  street  in  Jerusalem  ?3  Even 
doubters  have  here  admitted  that  there  is  no  real  difficulty;4 
and  why  should  not  we?  Is  the  silence  of  a  prejudiced 
Jew  to  be  set  against  the  declarations  of  an  inspired 
Apostle  ? 

The  events  of  this  portion  of  the  sacred  narrative  come 
to  their  close  with  the  notice  of  the  divinely  ordered  jour- 
ney back  from  Egypt  on  the  death  of  Herod,  and  the  final 


was  five  days  before  the  death  of  Herod.   See  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  1.33.  8;  and 
compare  above,  p.  81,  note  1. 

1  See  Josephus,  Antiq.  xvir.  6.  2,  Bell.  Jud.  I.  33.  2.  This  was  an  outbreak 
caused  by  the  harangues  of  two  expounders  of  the  law,  Judas  and  Matthias, 
and  resulted  in  the  destruction  of  a  large  golden  eagle  of  considerable  value 
which  Herod  had  erected  over  the  gate  of  the  temple.  From  the  tenor  of  the 
narrative  (/3acri\fvs  Se  KaraSriaas  avrovs  £  |  e  ir  e/xire  v  eh  'lepixovvra,  §  3) 
and  the  subsequent  oration  in  the  theatre  (comp.  Antiq.  xv.  8.  1),  it  would  seem 
that  Herod  was  at  this  time  in  Jerusalem.  The  date  of  the  execution  of  these 
unhappy  zealots,  which  probably  almost  immediately  followed  their  apprehen- 
sion, can  be  fixed  with  certainty  to  the  night  of  March  12—13  (a.  u.  c.  750),  as 
Josephus  mentions  that  on  the  same  night  there  was  an  eclipse  of  the  moon 
(foe.  cit.  §  4).  See  Ideler,  Handb.  der  Chronol.  Vol.  ii.  p.  28,  and  comp.  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Si/nops.  I.  2,  p.  56. 

2  For  some  excellent  critical  remarks  on  the  citation  from  Jeremiah  in  reference 
to  Rachel  weeping  for  her  children,  see  Mill,  Observations,  u.  3.  1,  p.  402  sq.; 
and  for  a  good  sermon  on  the  text,  Jackson,  Creed,  Vol.  vi.  p.  277  (Oxf.  1844). 

3  It  is  distinctly  mentioned  by  Josephus  that  this  frantic  tyrant  had  all  the 
principal  men  of  the  nation  summoned  to  him  at  Jericho  and  shut  up  in  the 
hippodrome,  and  that  he  gave  orders  to  his  sister  Salome  and  her  husband 
Alexas  to  have  them  executed  immediately  he  died,  that  as  there  would  be  no 
mourners  for,  there  might  be  some  at,  his  death.    Antiq.  xvn.  6.  5. 

■i  See  Schlosser,  Universalhistor.  Uebers.  der  alien  Welt,  Part  m.  1,  p.  261, 
referred  to  by  Neander,  Leben  Jesu  Chr.  p.  45.  For  several  questions  connected 
wilh  the  murder  of  the  Innocents,  including  some  characteristically  guarded 
remarks  on  their  number,  see  1'atritius,  de  Evang.  Dissert,  xxxin.  Part  in  p. 
375. 


Lect.  II.  OP   OUR  LORD.  85 

return  to  Nazareth.     Warned  by  God  in  a  dream  of  the 

death  of  Herod,  Joseph  at  once1  brings  back 

the  Holy  Child  and  His  mother;  and  thus,     Jwke*. 

-  _,  _  .  „         „  Matt.  ii.  19. 

alter  a  stay  in  Egypt  of  perhaps  far  fewer 
days2  than  Israel  had  there  sojourned  years,  the  word  of 
ancient  and   hitherto  unnoted  prophecy  receives  its  com- 
plete fulfilment,3  the  mystic  Israel  comes  up  to  the  land 
of  now  more  than  promise,  —  out  of  Egyj)t 
God  has  called  His  Son. 

To  what  exact  place  of  abode  the  blessed  Virgin  and 
Joseph  were  now  directing  their  steps  is  not  specially 
noticed  by  the  Evangelist.  We  may,  however,  perhaps 
reasonably  infer  from  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  that  this  homc- 

1  If  the  remark  made  above  (p.  83,  note  2)  be  correct,  the  same  inference  must 
be  made  iu  the  present  case,  that  the  heavenly  command  required  a  similar 
promptitude  on  the  part  of  Joseph,  and  that  the  faithful  guardian  delayed  not. 
We  may  observe,  however,  that  it  is  now  e'-yepdeis  TrapaAafie  Kal  Ttoptvov,  not 
eyep&tls  rrapaKufie  Kal  <pevey,  as  in  ver.  13.  This  did  not  escape  the  observation 
of  Chrysostom. 

2  If  the  dates  wc  have  adopted  arc  approximately  correct,  it  would  seem  that 
little  mure  than  a  fortnight  elapsed  between  the  flight  into  Egypt  and  the  death 
of  Herod,  and  t hat  consequently  we  must  conceive  the  stay  in  Egypt  to  have 
been  comparatively  short.  Greswell,  by  adopting  April,  a.u.c.  750,  as  the  date 
of  the  Nativity,  and  751  a.u.c.  as  the  death-year  of  Herod,  is  compelled  to 
assume  a  stay  there  of  about  seven  months.  Sec  Dissert,  xu.  Vol.  ii.  p.  392. 
The  apocryphal  writers  still  more  enlarge  this  period  (':cxacto  vcro  triennio 
rcdiit  ex  Egypto,"  Beany.  Inf.  Arab.  cap.  xxvi.;  compare  Pseudo-Matt. 
Evang.  cap.  xxvi.),  almost  evidently  for  the  purpose  of  interpolating  a  series  of 
miracles. 

8  This  citation  from  ancient  prophecy  has  been  much  discussed.  Without 
entering  into  the  detail  of  objections  which  have  in  many  cases  proved  as  frivo- 
lous as  they  are  irreverent,  we  may  observe,  (1)  that  it  seems  certain  that  Bosea 
xi.  1  is  the  passage  referred  to.  See  Jerome  in  Inc.  Eusebius,  Eclog.  Proph.  p. 
4''i  si|.  (ed.  Gaisford);  and  (2)  that  little  doubt  can  be  entertained  that  the  catho- 
lic interpretation  which  makes  Israel  and  the  promised  Seed  stand  in  typical 
relations  ( e'Ae'x^T?  hrl  tg3  Aay  tvwikcais,  e|c/8jj  5e  eis  tov  Xpicrrbi'  aX^tuwi,  — 
Theopb.  in  loc.,  in  substance  from  Chrysostom)  is  no  less  true  and  correct  than 
it  is  simple  and  natural.  St.  Matthew,  as  writing  principally  to  Hebrew  readers 
and  to  men  who  felt  and  knew  that  the  nation  to  which  they  belonged  was  the 
true  i  and  most  veritable  type  of  their  Lord,  specifies  a  passage  which  they  had 
perhaps  considered  but  simple  history,  but  which,  with  the  light  of  inspiration 
Bhed  on  it.  assumes  every  attribute  of  mysterious,  and,  let  US  add,  to  them  at  any 
riiti'.  of  most  persuasive  prophecy.  For  farther  references  and  information,  the 
reader  may  profitably  consult  Spanheim,  hub.  Evang.  lxii. — i.xx.  Pari  n.p. 
471  sq.,  Deyling,  Ubs.  .Vac/-.  Vol.  iv.  p.  7U'J,  and  Mill,  on  Panth.  Principles,  n.  3. 
1, p.  4UU. 

8 


86  THE   BIRTH   AND   INFANCY  Lect.  II. 

ward  journey  would  have  terminated  at  Bethlehem,  —  that 
new  home  now  so  dear  to  them  from  its  many  marvellous 
associations,  that  home  which  now  might  have  seemed 
marked  out  to  them  by  the  very  finger  of  God,  had  not 
the  tidings  which  reached  Joseph,  that  the  evil  son  of  an 
evil  father,1  the  Ethnaroh  Archelaus,  was 
now  ruling  over  Judaea,  made  that  faithful 
guardian  afraid  to  return  to  a  land  so  full  of  hatred  and 
dangers.  While  thus,  perhaps,  in  doubt  and  perplexity, 
the  divine  answer  is  vouchsafed  to  his  anxieties,2  and 
Joseph  and  the  Virgin  are  directed  to  return  to  the  safer 
obscurity  of  their  old  home  in  the  hills  of  Galilee ;  and  the 
spirit  of  ancient  prophecy  again  finds  its  fulfilment  in  the 
designation  the  Messiah  receives  from  his  earthly  abode, 
"He  shall  be  called  a  Nazarene."3 


1  The  language  of  the  Jewish  deputies  to  Augustus  fully  justifies  this  remark : 
"  he  seemed  to  be  so  afraid,"  they  said,  "  lest  he  should  not  be  deemed  Herod's 
own  son,  that  he  took  especial  care  to  make  his  acts  prove  it."  See  Joseph. 
Antiq.  XVII.  11.  2. 

2  This  seems  to  lie  in  the  word  XPV^ric^ets  (vcr.  22).  Though  we  may  not 
perhaps  safely,  either  here  or  ver.  12,  or  indeed  in  the  New  Testament  generally, 
press  the  idea  of  a  definite  foregoing  question,  we  may  yet  so  far  retain  this 
usual  meaning  (xpV,a&T'l£el'  arroKpiveTaL,  Suid.)  as  to  regard  the  doubts  and 
fears  of  Joseph  as  the  practical  question  to  which  the  divine  answer  was 
returned.     See  Suicer,  TJiesaur.  s.  v.  Vol.  ii.  p.  1521. 

3  The  very  use  of  the  inclusive  5io  tu>v  ■wpocp-Q'ruiv  ought  to  prepare  us  to  expect, 
what  we  find  to  be  the  case,  that  this  is  no  citation  from  any  particular  prophet, 
but  expresses  the  declarations  of  several :  "  pluraliter  prophetas  vocando,  Mat- 
thaeusostendit  non  verba  de  Scriptuns  a  se  sumpta  sed  sensum."  —Jerome  in  Inc. 
We  seem  justified  then  in  assigning  to  the  word  Nafapaios  all  the  meanings 
legitimately  belonging  to  it,  by  derivation  or  otherwise,  which  are  concurrent 
with  the  declarations  of  the  prophets  in  reference  to  our  Lord.  We  may  there- 
fore, both  with  the  early  Hebrew  Christians  (see  Jerome)  and  apparently  the 
whole  Western  Church,  trace  this  prophetic  declaration,  (a)  principally  and  pri- 
marily, in  all  the  passages  which  refer  to  the  Messiah  under  the  title  of  the 
Branch  ("".3.)  of  the  root  of  Jesse  (Isaiah  xi.  1;  compare  Jerem.  xxiii.  5, 
xxxiii.  15;  Zech.  vi.  11);  (6)  in  the  references  to  the  circumstances  of  lowliness 
and  obscurity  under  which  that  growth  was  to  take  place  (comp.  Isaiah  liii.  2); 
and  perhaps  further  (c)  in  the  prophetic  notices  of  a  contempt  and  rejection 
(Isaiah  liii.  3),  such  as  seems  to  have  been  the  common  and,  as  it  would  seem  in 
many  respects,  deserved  portion  of  the  inhabitant  of  rude  and  ill-reputed  Naza- 
reth. See  above,  p.  57,  note  2,  and  for  further  information  and  illustrations, 
Spanheim,  JJub.  Erang.  xc. — xcn.  Part  II.  p.  598  sq.,  Deyling,  Obs.  Sacr.  XL. 
Vol.  i.  p.  176,  l'atritius,  de  Evang.  Dissert,  xxxvu.  Part  III.  p.  406,  Mill, 
Observations,  n.  8. 1,  p.  422  sq. 


Lect.  II.  OF   OUR   LORD.  87 

I  must  now  at  once  bring  this  lecture  to  a  close,  yet 
not  without  two  or  three  sentences  of  earnest  exhortation 
to  you,  brethren,  who  form  the  younger  portion  of  this 
audience. 

If  there  be  ought  in  these  hasty  outlines  of  contested  por- 
tions of  Evangelical  history  that  has  arrested 
your  attention,  and  deepened  your  convic- 
tions, I  will  pray  to  God  that  it  may  yet  work  more  and 
more  in  your  hearts,  and  lead  you  to  feel  that  there  is 
indeed  a  quick  and  living  truth  in  every  sentence  of  the 
blessed  Gospel,  and  that  they  who  read  with  a  loving  and 
reverential  spirit  shall  find  it  in  its  fullest  measures.  O, 
pray  fervently  against  the  first  motions  of  a  spirit  of  doubt- 
ing and  questioning.  By  those  prayers  which  you  learned 
at  a  mother's  knees,  by  that  holy  history  which,  perchance, 
you  first  heard  from  a  mother's  lips,  give  not  up  the  first 
child-like  faith  of  earlier  and  it  may  be  purer  days,  —  that 
simple,  heroic  faith,  which  such  men  as  Xiebuhr1  and  Nean- 
der2  knew  how  to  appreciate  and  to  glorify,  even  while 
they  felt  its  fullest  measures  could  never  be  their  own. 
Remember  that  when  faith  grows  cold  love  soon  passes 
away,  and  hope  soon  follows  it ;  and,  O,  believe  me,  that 
the  world  cannot  exhibit  a  spectacle  more  utterly  mourn- 

l  It  must  be  regarded  as  very  striking,  that  the  great  historian  who  could 
express  himself  with  such  strength  and  even  bitterness  of  language  against 
much  that,  however  exaggerated  it  may  have  been  in  the  ease  in  question,  was 
really  fundamentally  sound  in  pietism  (see  Letter  cci.xsx.),  could  yet  feel  it 
right  to  educate  his  son  in  a  way  that  must  have  led  to  the  deepest  reverence  for 
the  very  fetter  of  the  inspired  records.  These  are  Niebuhr's  own  words:  "He 
[his  sun]  shall  believe  in  the  letter  of  the  Old  and  >"e\v  Testaments,  and  I  shall 
nurture  in  him,  from  his  Infancy,  a  firm  faith  in  all  that  I  have  lost,  or  feel 
uncertain  about."  —  Life  and  Letters,  Vol.  ii.  p.  101  (Transl.  1852). 

-  After  smile  comments  on  extreme  views  as  to  what  is  termed,  not  perhaps 
\'  i  -  correctly,  "the  <</</  mechanical  view  of  inspiration,"  this  thoughtful  writer 
thus  proceeds:  "But  this  [existence  of  chasms  in  the  Gospel  history]  only 
affords  room  for  the  exercise  of  our  faith,  —  a  faith  whose  root  is  to  be  found, 
not  in  demonstration,  but  in  the  humble  and  self-denying  submission  of  our 
spirits.  Our  scientific  views  may  be  defective  in  many  points;  our  knowledge 
Itself  may  be  but  fragmentary;  but  our  religious  interests  will  find  all  that  is 
ary  to  attach  them  to  Christ  as  the  ground  of  salvation  and  the  archetype 
of  holiness."  —  L\fe  qf  Jesus  Christ,  p. '.»  (I'.ohn),  —  a  paraphrastic,  but  substan- 
tial]) correct  representation  of  the  original. 


88  BIRTH    AND    INFANCY    OF    OUR    LORD.  Lect.  II. 

ful,  more  full  of  deepest  melancholy,  than  a  young  yet 
doubting,  a  fresh  yet  unloving,  an  eager  yet  hopeless  and 
forsaken  heart. 

May  these  humble  words  have  wrought  in  you  the  con- 
viction, that  if  with  a  noble  and  loving  spirit, 

Acts  xvii.  11. 

like  the  lieraeans  oi  old,  we  search  the  Scrip- 
tures, we  shall  full  surely  find,  —  yea,  verily,  that  we  who 
may  go  forth  weeping  to  gather  up  the  few  scattered  ears 
of  truth  that  might  seem  all  that  historical  scepticism 
had  now  left  us,  shall  yet  return  with  joy, 
and  bring  with  us  the  sheaves  of  accumulated 
convictions,  and  the  plenitudes  of  assurance  in  the  ever- 
lasting truth  of  every  part  and  every  portion  of  the  Gos- 
pel of  Jesus  Christ. 


LECTURE   III. 

THE  EARLY  JUDyEAN  MINISTRY. 

AND  JESUS  INCREASED  IN  WISDOM  AND  8TATDRE,  AND  IN  FAVOR  WITH  GOD 

and  man.  —  St.  Luke  ii.  52. 

In  my  last  lecture,  brethren,  we  concluded  with  that 
portion  of  the  sacred  narrative  which  briefly 
notices  the  return  of  the  Holy  Family  to  ofJurL^JJiw™ 
Nazareth,  and  the  fulfilment  of  the  spirit  of 
ancient  prophecy  in  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  being 
called  a  Nazarene.  Between  that  event  and  the  group  of 
events  which  will  form  the  subject  of  this  afternoon's  lec- 
ture, and  which  make  up  what  may  be  termed  our  Lord's 
early  Judaean  ministry,  one  solitary  occurrence  is  recorded 
in  the  Gospel  narrative,  —  our  Lord's  second  appearance 
in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  his  second  presentation  in  His 
Father's  house. 

With  the  single  exception  of  the  notice  of  this  deeply 
interesting  event,  the  whole  history  of  the 
Saviour's   childhood,   youth,  and   even   early     EvangeWsu. 
manhood,  is  passed  over  by  all  the  Evangel- 
ists with  a  most  solemn  reserve.     Even  he  of  them  who 
appears  to  have  received  so  much,  directly  or  indirectly, 
from  the  blessed  Virgin  herself,1  and  from  whom  we  might 
have  expected   some  passing  notices  of  that  mysterious 
childhood1,  —  even  he   would  seem  to  have  been  specially 
moved  to  seal  all  in  silence,  and  to  relate  no  more  than 
this  one  event  which  marks  the  period  when  the  Holy  One 
was  just  passing  the  dividing  line  between  childhood   and 

i  Sue  the  remarks  above,  \>.  20,  note  5. 

8* 


90  THE   EARLY  JUDJGAN  MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

youth.     Both  periods,  that  preceding  and  that  succeeding 
this  epoch,  are  described  in  two  short  verses, 

Luke  ii.  40  and  52.  L 

closely  similiar  in  expression,  and  tending 
alike  to  show  that  the  outward  and  earthly  development 
of  our  Redeemer  was  in  strict  accordance  with  those  laws 
by  which  those  He  came  to  save  pass  from  childhood  into 
youth,  and  from  youth  into  mature  age.1 

In  regard  of  the  first  period,  that  of  the  childhood,  one 

short  clause  is  graciously  added  to  warn  us 

Tlie  brief  notice  . 

of  our  Lord's  chad-     from  unlicensed  musings  upon  the  influences 

of  outward  things  upon  the  Holy  Child,2  — 

Luke  a.m.         one   clause    only,    but    enough,  —  "and    the 

grace  of  God  was  upon  Him." 
In  regard  of  the  second  period,  that  of  the  Lord's  youth 
and  early  manhood,  one  event  at  its  commencement,  which 
shows  us  how  that  grace  unfolded  itself  in  heavenly  wis- 


1  It  is  well  said  by  Cyril  of  Alexandria :  "  Examine,  I  pray  you,  closely  the 
profoundness  of  the  dispensation ;  the  Word  endures  to  be  born  in  human 
fashion,  although  in  His  divine  nature  He  has  no  beginning,  nor  is  subject  to 
time.  He,  who  as  God  is  all-perfect,  submits  to  bodily  growth:  the  Incorporeal 
has  limbs  that  advance  to  the  ripeness  of  manhood.  .  .  .  The  wise  Evangelist  did 
not  introduce  the  Word  in  His  abstract  and  incorporate  nature,  and  so  say  of 
Him  that  He  increased  in  stature  and  wisdom  and  grace,  but,  after  having 
shown  that  He  was  born  in  the  flesh  of  a  woman,  and  took  our  likeness,  he  then 
assigns  to  Him  these  human  attributes,  and  calls  Him  a  child,  and  says  that  he 
waxed  in  stature,  as  His  body  grew  little  by  little,  in  obedience  to  corporeal 
laws." — Comment,  en  Luke,  Part  I.  p.  29,  SO  (Transl.).  So,  too,  Origen:  "  Et 
crescebat,  inquit,  humiliaverat  enim  se,  formam  servi  accipieus,  et  eadem  virtute 
qua  se  humiliaverat,  crescit."  —  In  Luc.  Horn.  xix.  Vol.  hi.  p.  953  (ed.  Bened.). 

2  On  this  subject  see  more  below,  p.  99  sq.  Meanwhile,  we  may  justly  record 
our  protest  against  the  way  in  which  a  most  serious  and  profound  question  is 
now  usually  discussed,  and  the  repulsive  freedom  which  many  modern  writers, 
not  only  in  Germany,  but  even  in  this  country,  permit  themselves  to  assume 
when  alluding  to  the  mental  development  of  the  Holy  Child.  See,  for  example, 
the  highly  objectionable  remarks  of  Hase  (Leben  Jesu,  §  31,  p.  56),  in  which  this 
writer  plainly  tells  us  at  the  outset  that  "the  spiritual  development  of  Jesus 
depended  on  fortunate  gifts  of  nature"  (glucklichen  Naturgaben);  and  that 
these,  though  enhanced  by  the  purposes  and  circumstances  of  His  after-life,  still 
never  went  beyond  the  culture  of  the  time  and  country,  and  never  "  transcended 
the  limits  of  humanity."  Compare,  too,  Von  Amnion,  Leben  Jesu,  i.  10,  Vol. 
i.  p.  236,  where  the  highly  questionable  views  of  Theodorus  of  Mopsuestia  find  a 
ready  defender;  and  for  an  example  from  writers  of  our  country  of  eloquent 
and  attractive  but  still  painfully  humanitarian  comments  on  this  mysterious 
subject,  see  Kobeitson,  Sermons,  Vol.  ii.  p.  196. 


Lkct.  III.  THE   EARLY  JUDJEAN   MINISTRY.  91 

dom,1  is  made  fully  known  to  us,  —  one  event,  but  one 
only,  to  which  one   short  verse,  that   of  our 

•     .  .  Equally  brief  no- 

text,  is  added,  to  teach  us   how  that  wisdom     ucc  o/ our  Lord's 
waxed  momently  more  full,  more  deep,  more 
broad,  until,  like  some  mighty  river  seeking  the  sea,  it 
merged  insensihiy  into   the  omniscience  of 

Luke  ii.  52. 

His  limitless  Godhead.2     One  further  touch 

completes  the  divine  picture,  —  "  in  favour  with  God  and 


1  On  this  subject  the  following  arc  the  sentiments  of  Gregory  of  Nazianzus: 
"  lie  was  making  advance,  as  in  stature  so  also  in  wisdom  and  grace.  Not  by 
those  qualities  receiving  increase,  —  for  what  can  be  more  perfect  than  that 
which  is  so  from  the  very  beginning?  —  but  by  their  being  disclosed  and  revealed 
by  little  and  little."—  Orat.  xx.  p.  343  (Paris,  1609).  It  may,  however,  be  justly 
doubted  whether  these  statements,  —  especially  the  negative  assertion, — though 
confessedly  in  close  accordance  with  some  expressions  of  Athanasiue  (TrpuK6ir- 
tovtos  too  (rw/xaros  TTpofKOirrev  iv  avrai  kcu  T)  <pav4po>ais  rys  deorrjTos  to?s 
bpwcriv.  Ado.  Arian.  in.  29.  14),  and  other  orthodox  writers,  are  not  unduly 
restricted,  and  whether  the  words  of  the  inspired  Evangelist  do  not  clearly 
imply  (to  use  the  language  of  Waterland)  that  our  Lord's  increase  in  wisdom  is 
to  be  understood  in  a  sense  as  "  literal,  as  His  increasing  in  stature  is  literal" 
[Script,  and  Avians  Compeared,  Vol.  iii.  p.  298).  While  then  with  these  catholic 
writers  we  may  certainly  acknowledge  a  gradual  and  progressive  disclosure  of 
the  Lord's  divine  wisdom,  we  must  certainly,  with  other  equally  catholic  writers, 
recognize  a  regular  development  and  increase  in  the  wisdom  and  grace  of  the 
reasonable  soul,  i.e.,  —  to  speak  with  psychological  accuracy,  of  the  tyvxh  and 
vovs;  the  true  and  complete  statement  being,  —  "Christum  secundum  sapien- 
tiam  divinam,  hoc  est  earn,  quae  ei  competit  tanquam  L>eo,  non  profecisse: 
secundum  sapientiam  autem  humanam,  hoc  est  earn,  qua?  ei  ut  homini  competit, 
yere  profecisse,  hominis  quidem  more,  sed  tamen  supra  modum  humanum."  — 
Suicer,  Thes.  Vol.  ii.p.  209  (appy.  from  Bernh.  de  Consid.  Book  n.).  In  a  word, 
then,  as  Cyril  of  Alexandria  (in  loc.)  briefly  says,  "  the  body  advances  in  stature 
and  the  [reasonable]  soul  in  wisdom.''  See  Ambrose,  de  Iiicarn.  cap.  72  sq.  Vol. 
ii.  1,  p.  887  (ed.  Migne),  Kpiphanius,  Beer,  lxxvii.  26,  Vol.  i.  p.  1019  (Paris,  1G22), 
and  the  good  note  of  the  Oxford  Translator  (J.  H.Newman)  of  Athanasius, 
Select  Treatises,  Disc.  in.  Tart  n.  p.  474(Libr.  of  Fathers). 

2  This  simile,  though  merely  intended  to  illustrate  generally  a  profound  mys- 
tery, and  not  to  be  pressed  with  dogmatic  exactness,  is  still,  as  it  would  seem, 
substantially  correct.  The  fact  of  the  present  verse  (Luke  ii.  52)  being  one  of 
those  urged  by  the  heretical  sect  of  the  Agnoetse,  as  tending  to  show  limitations 
even  in  our  Lord's  divine  nature,  was  not  improbably  the  cause  of  its  having 
received  some  interpretations  (see  above)  so  rigid,  as  to  favor  by  inference  the 
Apollinarian  statement  that  the  Word  itself  was  in  the  place  of  roTs  (Pearson, 
Oreed,  Vol. il.  p.  122,  ed.  Burton).  The  whole  subject,  and  a  scholastic  discus- 
sion, "de  Christi  scientia  el  nesoientia  et  profectu  secundum  humanrtatem,"  will 
be  found  in  Forbes,  Instruct.  Bist.-Theol.  Book  in.  ch.  19,  20.  See  Petav. 
Dogm.  Theol.  {de  Incarn.  xi.  2)  Vol.  \i.  p.  C9,  Suicer,  Thesaur.  s.  v.  Ao'-yos,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  268,  and  the  sensible  remarks  of  Boyse  on  our  Lord's  omniscience,  )'iudic. 
of  our  Saviour's  Deity,  Vol.  ii.  p.  23  sq.  (Loud.  1728). 


92  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  HI. 

man,"  perchance  designed  to  hint  to  ns  that  the  out- 
ward form  corresponded  to  the  inner  development,  that 
the  fulness  of  heavenly  wisdom  dwelt  in  a  shrine  of  out- 
ward perfection  and  beauty,1  and  that  the  ancient  tradi- 
tion,2 which  assigned  no  form  or  comeliness  to  "the  fairest 

1  Upon  this  point,  it  need  scarcely  be  said,  nothing  certain  can  be  adduced. 
From  the  Gospels  we  seem  to  be  able  to  infer  that  our  Lord's  outward  form,  on 
one  occasion  at  least,  sensibly  struck  the  beholders  with  a  feeling  of  the 
majesty  and  dignity  of  Him  who  condescended  to  wear  the  garments  of  our 
mortality.  Compare  John  xviii.  6.  Perhaps,  however,  we  may  go  so  far  as  to 
say,  that  there  was  still  nothing  that  merely  outwardly  marked  the  Redeemer 
of  the  world  as  strikingly  different  from  the  general  aspect  of  the  men  of  his 
own  time  and  country,  otherwise  it  would  seem  strange  that  the  Apostles  who 
beheld  him  by  the  lake  of  Gennesareth,  and  to  whom  He  was  near  enough  to 
be  easily  heard  (John  xxi.  4  sq.),  did  not  instantly  recognize  who  it  was.  The 
similar  failure  of  recognition  in  the  case  of  the  two  disciples  going  to  Emmaus 
(Luke  xxiv.  13  sq.)  can  perhaps  hardly  be  urged,  owing  to  the  Evangelist's  own 
remark  (ver.  1G),  and  the  further  illustrative  comment  of  St.  Mark  (ev  erepa 
fxopcpfj,  ch.  xvi.  12).  This,  perhaps,  is  all  that  can  safely  be  urged.  The  more  dis- 
tinct descriptions  of  our  Lord's  appearance,  especially  those  in  the  Epistle  of 
Lentulus  (see  Fabricius,  Codex  Apocr.  N.  T.  Vol.  i.  p.  301  sq.),  and  the  very  simi- 
lar one  of  Epiphanius  Monachus(p.  29,  ed.  Dressel,  —  and  cited  by  Winer,  P.WB. 
Art.  "Jesus,"  Vol.  i.  p.  576,  after  a  better  text  supplied  to  him  by  Tischendorf), 
appear  clearly  to  be  due  to  the  imagination  and  conceptions  of  the  writers.  The 
statue  of  our  Lord  said  by  Eusebius  (//«£.  Eccl.  VII.  18)  to  have  been  erected  at 
Caesarea  Philippi  by  the  woman  with  the  issue  of  blood  (Matt.  ix.  20),  might  per- 
haps be  urged  as  showing  that  our  Lord's  appearance  was  not  unknown  to  the 
early  Church,  if  it  did  not  appear  probable  from  historical  considerations  that 
the  statue  in  question  really  never  represented  our  Lord,  and  was  never  erected 
under  the  alleged  circumstances.  See  the  "  Excursus  "  of  Heinichen,  in  his  edi- 
tion of  Eusebius,  //.  E.,  Vol.  iii.  p.  396  sq.  The  student  who  is  anxious  to  pursue 
further  this  interesting  but  not  very  profitable  subject,  will  find  abundant  notices 
in  Winer,  RWB.  Vol.  i.  p.  576,  and  especially  in  Hase,  LebenJesu,  §  34,  p.  62  sq. 
(ed.  3),  Hofmann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  67,  p.  292  sq. ;  and  may  consult  the  special  work 
of  Keiske.  de  Imar/inibus  Christi  (Jen.  1685).  Some  curious  remarks  of  Origen  in 
reference  to  a  supposed  diversity  in  our  Lord's  appearance  to  different  persons, 
will  be  found  in  the  Latin  translation  of  that  great  writer's  commentaries  on 
Mutt.  §  100,  Vol.  iii.  p.  906  (ed.  Bened.).  Comp.  Norton,  Genuineness  of  Gospels, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  274  (ed.  2). 

2  See  Justin  Martyr,  Tryplio,  cap.  14,  Vol.  ii.  p.  52  (ed.  Otto):  Toov  re  \6yoiv 
TOVToiv  Ka\  TOtovToov,  elpy];xevo}V  vnb  rwv  irpocpijTcoi',  theyov  Co  Tpv(puiv,  oi  fief 
etp-nvrai  eis  t)-\v  ivpwTriu  ■Kapova'iav  -rod  Xptarov,  iv  fi  i<a\  a.Ttfxos  nal  aeiS-tj  s 
i«xl  &V71TOS  <pavi}<jeaStai  KeK7)puyfj.euos  eariv,  oi  Se  els  -rrjv  Sevrepav  avrov 
Tfapovaiav.  So  still  more  distinctly  Clem.  Alex.  Pcedag.  ill.  1.  3:  Tbv  Be  Kvpiov 
ainbv  r))v  otyiv  alaxpbv  yeyovevai  Bia  'Hffaiov  to  Xlvevfia  /j.aprvpe7.  Compare 
Strom,  in.  17.  103,  Orig.  Cels.  vi.  p.  327  (ed.  Spencer),  — where  the  concession  is 
made  to  Celsus,  and  Tertu.ll.  de  Came  Chr.  cap.  9,  adv.  Jud.  cap.  14.  This 
opinion,  however,  soon  began  to  be  modified.  See  Augustine,  Serin,  cxxxviu. 
Vol.  v.  p.  76(3  (ed.  Migne),  and  Jerome,  Epist.  lxv.  Vol.  i.  p.  3S0  (ed.  Vail.),  who 
well  remarks,  — "Nisi  habuisset  et  in  vultu  quiddam  oculisque  sidereum,  nun- 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  93 

of  the  children  of  men,"1   w.is  but  a  narrow  and  unworthy 
application    of  the  merely  general  terras  of 

11  J     s  Ch.  ISO,  8. 

Isaiah's  prophecy. 

Thus  waxing  strong  in  spirit  and  in  the  grace  of  His 

heavenly    Father,    the    Holy    Child,    when 

J  .  .  i ''•-'' '" ""•  7""»- 

twelve  years  old,  goes  up  with  both  his  pa-    pre   when   twdve 

rents  to  the  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  not,  how- 
ever, as  a  worshipper,  nor  as  yet  even  what  Hebrew  phra- 
seology has  termed  a  "  Son  of  the  Law,"  though  possibly 
as  a  partaker  in  some  preparatory  rite  which  ancient  cus- 
tom might  have  associated  with  that  age  of  commencing 
puberty.2  We  observe  that  it  is  incidentally  noticed  that 
the  blessed  Virgin,  not  only  on  this  occasion, 

_  Lide  ii.  41. 

but  every  year,  went  up  with  Joseph  to  the 

great  festival  of  her  nation.     Like  Haunali       *  s".'"„-  "•  19: 

o  eomp.  1. 1. 

of  old,  year   after   year,  though    compelled 

neither  by  law  nor  by  custom,3  she  might  have  longed  to 


qnam  cum  statim  secuti  fuissent  Apostoli,  nee  qui  ad  comprehendendum  cum 
yenerant,  corruissent." 

1  Chrysostom  rightly  urges  this  indirect  prophecy:  Oi;8e  yap  2>avnaTovpyai> 
■Jjj/  ^av/xaarbs  fxovov,  aWa  teal  <pa.iu6nevos  irok\r\s  eye/xe  xdpnos,  Kal  rovro  6 
trpo(pr]TT}s  StjA.&jj'  t\eyev  'npcuos  KaWet  irapa.  robs  vioiis  toiv  avSpdmoiv. 
Horn,  in  Matt,  xviii.  2,  Vol.  vii.  p.  371  (ed.  Bened.). 

-'  This  perhaps  is  the  critically  exact  statement,  as  it  would  certainly  seem  that 
the  age  of  puberty  was  not  considered  as  actually  attained  till  the  completion  of 
the  thirteenth  year.  See  Jost,  <:<  schichte  des  Judenth.  in.  3.  11,  Vol.  i.  p.  398 
(where  the  statement  of  Ewald  is  rectified);  and  compare  Greswell,  Dissert,  xn. 
Vol.  i.  p.  896,  and  ih.  xviii.  Vol.  ii.  p.  130.  It  has  been  doubted,  then,  whether 
on  this  occasion  our  Lord  was  taken  up  to  celebrate  the  festival,  or  whether  it 
w  :i<  merely  to  appear  before  the  Lord  in  company  with  His  parents,  and  jirrhaps 
take  part  in  some  introductory  ceremony.  The  patristic  commentators  (e.  g. 
Cyril  Alex.  "  upon  the  Miinmons  of  the  feast,"  Tart  I.  p.  30,  and  probably  Ori- 
g<  ii.  Ham.  in  Luc.  xix.)  appear  rather  to  advocate  the  former  opinion,  and 
would  lead  us  to  think  that  our  Lord,  either  in  compliance  with  the  wishes  of 
His  parents,  or  more  probably  in  Accordance  with  His  own  desire  (comp.  ver. 
49),  attended  the  festival  as  an  actual  worshipper.  The  latter  opinion,  however, 
seems  most  correct,  and  most  in  accordance  with  what  we  know  of  Jewish  cus- 
toms. See  Greswell,  /.  <■.  Vol.  i.  p.  397.  The  rule  appears  to  have  been  that  all 
males  were  to  attend  the  three  great  festivals,  "  Exceptie  surdo,  stulto,  puernlo 
....  puerolna  antem  ille  dicitur,  qui,  nisi  a  patre  maim  trahatnr  incedere  non 
valet."  -  Bartolocci,  Biblioth.  Rabbin.  Vol.  hi.  p.  132.  Compare  Lightfoot,  Ilor. 
Il.hr.  (in  h,r.)  p.  199  (Roterod.  1686). 

■•:  See  the  very  distinct  quotation  adduced  by  Schoettgen  [Bar.  Web.  Vol.  i.  p. 
2G0),  from  which  it  would  appear  that   the  injunction  of  Hillel,  that  women 


94  THE    EARLY   JUD2EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

enter  into  the  move  immediate  presence  of  the  God  of 
Israel,  and,  though  but  dimly  conscious  of  the  eventful 
future,  might  have  felt  with  each  revolving  year  a  mys- 
terious call  to  that  Festival,  of  which  the  Holy  Child 
beside  her  was  hereafter  to  be  the  Lamb  and  the  sacrifice. 
After  the  paschal  solemnities  were  celebrated,  most 
probably  on  the  afternoon  of  the  eighth  day,1 

Search  for  and  .  , 

discovery  o/  the  the  Virgin  and  Joseph  turn  their  steps  back- 
wards to  Galilee,  —  but  alone.  They  deem 
the  Holy  Child  was  in  another  portion  of  the  large  pil- 
grim-company,—  perhaps  with  contemporaries  to  whom, 
after  the  solemnities  they  had  shared  in,  ancient  custom 
might  have  assigned  a  separate  jdace  in  the  festal  caravan,2 
and  they  doubt  not  that  at  their  evening  resting-place 
among  the  hills  of  Benjamin  (not  improbably  that  Beeroth 
which  tradition  has  fixed  upon),3  they  shall  be  sure  to  find 


Bfaonld  once  attend  the  pnssover,  was  not  binding,  and  indeed  self-contradictory. 
Such  a  habit  on  the  part  of  the  blessed  Virgin  must  be  referred  to  her  piety. 
Schoettgen  quotes  from  the  tract,  "  Mechilta,"  a  similar  instance  in  the  case  of 
the  wife  of  Jonah,  —  "  Uxor  Jonaj  ascendit  ad  celebraiida  festa  solemnia  "  [loc. 
cit.). 

1  It  has  been  correctly  observed  by  Lightfoot  (Hbr.  Hebr.  in  loc.  p.  740),  that 
the  expression  reKiiwaawTdif  ras  ri[xepas  (Luke  ii.  43)  seems  certainly  to  imply 
that  the  Holy  Family  staid  the  full  time  of  seven  days  at  Jerusalem.  During 
this  time  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  youthful  Saviour  had  been  observed  by 
some  of  the  members  of  the  venerable  assemblage  among  whom  he  was  subse- 
quently found.  Perhaps  even,  with  Euthymius,  we  might  further  attribute  the 
Lord's  prolonged  stay  to  a  desire  to  consort  longer  with  those  on  whom  the 
words  of  grace  and  wisdom  which  fell  from  His  lips  could  not  but  have  produced 
a  startling  and  perhaps  long-remembered  effect:  VTT€/J.eife  Se,  drovv  uirehc'icpdTi 
iv  'lefioucraXi'iiJ;  fiov\6/j.evos  ffujj.jj.l^ai  to7s  SfScw/caAois  (Vol.  ii.  p.  279,  ed. 
Matt.). 

2  GresweU  urges,  on  the  authority  of  Maimonides  (de  Sacr/f.  Pasch.  ii.  4),  that 
a  paschal  company  could  not  be  composed  of  "pueri  impuberes.-'  This  would 
seem  certainly  correct  (comp.  Mishna,  "  Pesachim,"  vn.  4,  p.  118  of  De  Sola's 
transl.);  but  it  does  not  seem  to  militate  against  the  assumption  in  the  text,  that 
in  returning  a  separate  company  might  be  formed  of  those  who  had  gone 
through  the  preliminary  ceremony  which  Maimonides  himself  seems  to  allude 
to.    Comp.  de  Sacr,  Solemn,  n.  3  (cited  by  GresweU,  Vol.  i.  p.  397). 

3  The  usual  resting-place  for  the  night  appears  to  have  been  Sichem,  which, 
though  in  Samaria,  was  not  forbidden  as  a  temporary  station  :  "Terra  Samarita- 
noiiim  niiinda  est,  et  fontes  mundi,  et  mausioues  mundae,"  Talm.  Hieros.  "Abo- 
clah  Zarah,"  fol.  44.  4,  cited  by  Sepp,  Leben  Chrisli,  Vol.  ii.  p.  45.  But  tradition 
ami  probability  appear  to  prevail  iu  favor  of  Beer  or  Beeroth,  a  place  distant, 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY  JUD^EAN   MINISTRY.  95 

Him.  But  they  find  Him  not.  Full  of  trouble,  they  turn 
backwards  to  Jerusalem ;  a  day  is  spent  in  anxious  search, 
perhaps  among  the  travelling  companies  which  would  now 
in  fast  succession  be  returning  homeward  from  the  Holy 
City ;  yet  another  day  they  search  in  vain.1  On  the  third 
they  find  the  Holy  Child,  but  in  what  an  unexpected 
place,  and  under  circumstances  how  mysterious  and  un- 
looked-for. In  the  precincts  of  the  temple,  most  probably 
in  one  of  the  rooms2  where,  on  Sabbath  days  and  at  the 
great  festivals,  the  Masters  of  Israel  sat  and  taught,  they 
find  Him  they  had  so  long  sought  for.  They  find  Him 
sitting  in  the  midst  of  that  venerable  circle; 

,  r~t  i .     t  ,        r  i  i  Luke  ii.  46. 

sitting,  yet  at  no  Gamaliels  feet,  but,  as  the 
words  would   seem  to  imply,  spontaneously  raised  to  a 
position  of  equal  dignity;  not  the  hearer  only,  but  the 
indirect   teacher   by   the   divine    depth    of  His    mysteri- 
ous questions.4     No  wonder  that  the  Evangelist  should 


according  to  Robinson  (Palest.  Vol.  i.  p.  452),  about  three  hours  from  Jerusalem. 
Com]).  Winer,  RWB.  s.  v.  "  Beer.''  Vol.  i.  p.  146. 

1  The  exact  manner  in  which  the  time  specified  was  spent  has  been  differently 
estimated.  It  seems  most  reasonable  to  suppose  that  one  day  was  spent  in  the 
return  and  search  on  the  road,  a  second  in  fruitless  search  in  Jerusalem,  and 
that  on  the  third  the  Holy  Child  was  found.  The  remark  of  Bengel  is  curious: 
"  Tres.  Numeros  mysticus.  Totidem  dies  mortnus  a  discipulis  pro  amisso  habi- 
tus est."  If  there  be  anything  in  this,  we  might  feel  disposed  to  adopt  rather 
the  ( iew  of  Kuthymius:  "  One  day  they  spent,  when  they  went  a  day's  journey 
ami  sought  for  lliin  among  their  kinsfolk  and  acquaintance;  a  second,  when,  in 
consequence  of  not  having  found  Him,  they  returned  to  Jerusalem  seeking  Him; 
in  the  course  of  the  third  day  they  at  length  found  Him." —  Comment,  on  Luke 
ii.  44.  The  expression  Me^'  VlJ-tpa-s  rpus  seems,  however,  rather  in  favor  of  the 
first  view.    Comp.  Meyer  in  he. 

2  We  learn  from  the  Tahnudic  gloss  cited  by  Lightfoot  (in  loc.),  that  there  was 
DO  8j  nagogue  "  near  the  court,  in  the  mountain  of  the  Temple."  Comp.  Dey- 
ling,  Obs.  Sacr.  xxx.  Vol.  iii.  p.  283,  Belaud,  Antiq.  i.  8.  6.  Here,  or  in  one  of 
the  many  buildings  attached  to  the  Temple,  apparently  on  its  eastern  side,  we 
may  conceive  the  Holy  Child  to  have  been  found.  See  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  I.  16, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  47.  and  Jost,  Oeach.  dea  Judenth.  n.  1.  2,  Vol.  i.  p.  140. 

8  The  Talmndio  statement,  cited  by  Lightfoot,  thai  scholars  did  not  sit,  but 
stand  ("a  diebus  Moms  ad  Babban  Gamalielem  non  didicerunt  legem  ni>i 
st antes,"  "Uegillah,"  fol.  21.  1),  is  apparently  untenable  (see  Vitringa,  de 
Synag.  Vol.  i.  p.  167),  and  not  to  be  pressed  In  the  present  passage.  The  words 
Kadft/Sjufeoi'  if  fxicrw  rwu  StSaffKaKccf  seem,  however,  to  bear  out  the  view 
adopted  In  the  text,  and  are  bo  interpreted  bj  l>e  Weite  in  /<«•. 

iThis  is   the  patristic  and,  as  it  would  seem,  correct  statement  of  the  exact 


96  THE   EARLY  JUD^AN  MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

tell   us   that    His   parents    when    they   saw    Him    "  were 
amazed;"   no  wonder   that   even    the   holy 

Luke  ii.  48. 

mother  when  she  gazed  on  that  august  as- 
semblage, when  she  saw,  as  she  perchance  might  have  seen,1 
the  now  aged  Hillel  the  looser,  and  Shammai  the  binder,2 
and  the  wise  sons  of  Betirah,  and  Rabban  Simeon,  Hillel's 
son,  and  Jonathan  the  paraphrast,  the  greatest  of  his  pupils, 
—  when  she  saw  these,  and  such  as  these,  all  hanging  on  the 
questions  of  the  Divine  Child,  no  wonder  that  she  forgot 
all  in  the  strange  and  unlooked-for  circumstances  in  which 

she  found  Him  she  had  so  sorrowinedy  sought 

Zufceii.49.  »ii     i  ■ 

for.  All  the  mother  speaks  out  in  her  half- 
reproachful  address,3  all  the  consciously  incarnate  Son  in 

relation  in  which  the  Holy  Child  now  stood  to  those  around  Him:  "  Quia  par- 
vulus  erat,  invenitur  in  medio  non  eos  doccns,  sed  interrogans  et  hoc  pro  a: tat  is 
ollicio,  ut  nos  doceret,  quid  pueris,  quamvis  sapientes  ct  eruditi  sint,  couveniret, 
ut  audiant  potius  magistros,  quam  docere  desiderent,  et  se  varia  ostentatione 
non  jactent.  Interrogabat  inquam  magistros,  non  ut  aliquid  disceret,  sed  ut 
interrogans  eruiliret."  —  Origen,  in  Luc.  Horn.  xix.  Vol.  iii.  p.  955  (ed.  Bcned.). 
"Those  very  questions,"  says  Bp.  Hall,  were  "instructions,  and  meant  to  teach." 
Conti  »)/>/■  ii.  1.  The  view  taken  by  Bp.  Taylor  (Life  of  Christ,  i.  7),  that  the 
present  exhibition  of  learning  was  little  short  of  miraculous,  seems  far  less  nat- 
ural, and  less  consonant  with  the  tenor  of  the  sacred  text. 

l  The  names  mentioned  in  the  text  belong  to  men  who  are  known  to  have 
been  alive  at  the  time,  and  who  occupied  conspicuous  places  among  the  circle  of 
Jewish  Doctors.  For  further  information  respecting  those  here  specilied,  see 
Sepp,  Leben  Christi,  1. 17,  Vol.  ii.  p.  47  sq.,  and  the  notices  of  Petrus  Galatinus, 
de  Arean.  Cath.  Ver.  cap.  2.  3,  p.  5  sq.  (Francof.  1G02).  There  may  be  some 
doubt  about  Hillel  being  still  alive;  but  if  our  assumed  date  of  this  event  (a.u.c. 
7(32)  is  correct,  and  the  dates  supplied  by  Sepp  (loc.  tit.)  are  to  be  relied  on,  we 
seem  justified  in  believing  that  that  venerable  teacher  was  one  of  those  thus 
preeminently  Messed. 

*  "  .shammai  ligat,  Hillel  solvit."  Comp.  Lightfoot,  in  Matt.  xvi.  19,  p.  378. 
For  an  account  of  the  general  principles  of  teaching  respectively  adopted  by 
these  celebrated  men  and  their  followers,  see  Jost,  Gesch.  des  Judenth.  II.  3. 13, 
Vol.  i.  p.  257  sq. 

•"  The  prominence  which  the  Virgin-mother  gives  to  the  relation  she  bore  to 
the  Holy  One  (hat  vouchsafed  to  be  born  of  her  can  hardly  be  accidental,— 
tskvov  ti  iTToi-qaas  TifiTu  ouTws,  ver.  48.  The  emphatic  position  ot  the  Trphs 
abrov  might  also  almost  lead  us  so  far  to  agree  with  Bp.  Hall  ("it  is  like  that 
she  reserved  this  question  till  she  had  Him  alone."  Contempt,  h.  1)  aa  to  think 
that  it  was  addressed  to  the  Divine  Child  in  tones  that  might  not  have  been 
heard,  or  intended  to  have  been  heard,  by  those  around.  All  the  patristic  exposi- 
tors comment  on  the  use  of  the  term  oi  yovtls  avrov,  and  o  iraTTjp  aov  in  refer- 
ence to  Joseph,  and  none  perhaps  with  more  point  than  Origen  :  "  Nee  miremur 
parentes  vocatos,  quorum  altera  ob  partum,  alter  ob  obsequium,  patris  et  niatris 


Lect.  in.  THE   EARLY  JTJD.EAN   MINISTRY.  97 

the  mysterious  simplicity  of  the  answer,  that  reminds  the 
earthly  mother  that  it  was  in  the  courts  of  His  heavenly 
Father's  house1  that  the  Son  must  needs  be  found,  that 
His  true  home  was  in  the  temple  of  Him  whose  glories 
still  lingered  round  the  heights  of  Moriah.  And  yet 
with  what  simple  pathos  is  it  noticed  by  the  Evangelist 
that  "  He  went  down,  and  came  to  Nazareth, 

Ver.  51. 

Mnd  was  subject  to  them."  As  that  Holy 
One  left  the  glories  of  heaven  to  tabernacle  with  men,  so 
now  in  retrospective  shadow  and  similitude  he  leaves  the 
blessedness  of  His  Father's  temple  for  the  humble  home 
of  earthly  parents,  and  remains  with  them  as  the  loving 
and  submissive  son,  the  sharer,  perhaps,  in  His  reputed 
father's  earthly  labors,2  the  consoler,  and  perchance  sup- 
porter, of  the  Avidowed  Virgin  after  the  righteous  son  of 
Jacob,  who  henceforth  appears  no  more  in  the  history,  had 
been  called  away  to  his  rest.3 


meruerunt  vocabula."  —  In  Luc.  Horn.  xix.  Vol.  iii.  p.  955  (ed.  Bened.).  So 
Augustine,  though  with  a  further  and  deeper  reference:  "Propter  quoddam 
cum  ejus  matre  sanctum  et  virginale  conjugium,  etiam  ispse  [Joseph]  parens 
Christi  meruit  appellari."  —  Contr.  Faust.  Manich.  in.  2,  Vol.  iii.  p.  214  (ed. 
Migne). 

l  The  exact  meaning  of  the  words  if  ro7s  rov  irarpSs  fiov  has  been  differently 
estimated.  Common  usage  (see  exx.  in  Lobeck,  Phrynicus,  p.  100),  and  still 
more  the  idea  of  locality,  which  would  seem  naturally  involved  in  an  answer  to 
the  preceding  notice  of  the  search  that  had  been  made,  may  incline  us  to  the 
gloss  of  Euthymius,  —  iv  rcS  oIkc?  tov  -Karp6s  /xov.  So  also  the  l'cshito-Syriac 
and  Armenian  versions;  the  Vulgate,  Coptic,  and  Gotliic  are  equally  indeter- 
minate with  the  original. 

'2  This  statement  is  perhaps  partially  supported  by  Mark  vi.  3,  oi>x  our6s  tariv 
6  TfKTaiv,  —  a  reading  which,  even  in  spite  of  the  assertion  of  Origen  in  reply 
to  Celsus,  that  our  Lord  is  never  described  in  the  four  Gospels  as  a  carpenter 
( (  hnlr.  ( 'els.  vi.  86),  must  certainly  be  retained.  See  Tischendorf,  in  loc.  AVhen 
we  add  to  this  the  old  tradition  preserved  by  Justin  Martyr  {Trypho,  cap.  88), 
that  our  Lord  made  "ploughs,  yokes,  and  other  implements  pertaining  to  hus- 
bandry," we  seem  fully  warranted  in  believing  that  our  Redeemer  vouchsafed  to 
set  to  us  this  further  example  of  humility  and  dutiful  love.  The  silly  legends  of 
the  apocryphal  gospels  hardly  deserve  to  lie  noticed.  See,  however,  Evang. 
Thorn,  cap.  11,  Evang.  Inf.  Arab.  cap.  88,  89. 

8  See  above,  p.  86,  not"  '_'.  According  to  a  simple  comparison  of  two  passages 
in  the  apocryphal  EUtoria  ■!<>*<  phi  (cap.  11.  16),  this  took  place  in  the  eighteenth 
year  oi'  our  Lord.  Opon  such  authority,  however,  no  further  reliance  can  be 
placed  than,  perhaps,  as  the  expression  of  a  belief  in  the  early  Church  that 
Joseph  did  not,  as  Ambrose  seems  distinctly  to  imply  (de  Ins  tit.  Virg.  cap,  7, 

9 


ErivoJous  nature 

cied  it  can  detect  inconsistencies  and  incon- 
gruities.1    And  yet  what  is  there  so  strange, 


98  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

And  this  is  the  narrative,  this  narrative  so  simple  and 
so  true,  in  which  modern  scepticism  has  fan- 

of    the     objections 
urged   aga 
narrative. 

what  so  inconceivable  ?  Does  the  age  of  the 
Holy  Child  seem  to  preclude  the  possibility  of  such  contact 
with  the  Masters  of  Israel,  when  the  historian  Josephus, 
as  he  himself  tells  us,2  was  actually  consulted  by  the  high 
priests  and  the  principal  men  of  the  city  at  an  age  but 
little  more  advanced  than  that  of  the  youthful  Saviour? 
Are  we  to  admit  such  precocity  in  the  case  of  the  son  of 
Matthias  and  deny  it  in  that  of  the  Son  of  God  ?  Or, 
again,  is  the  assumed  neglect  of  the  parents  to  be  urged 
against  the  credibility  of  the  narrative,3  when  we  know 
so  utterly  nothing  of  the  arrangement  of  these  travelling 
companies,  or  of  the  bands  and  groupings  into  which,  on 
such  solemn  occasions  as  the  present,  custom  might  have 
divided  the  returning  worshippers?  But  I  will  not  pause 
on  such  shallow  and  hapless  scepticism  ;  I  will  not  do  such 
dishonor  to  the  audience  before  which  I  stand  as  to  assume 
that  it  is  necessary  for  me  to  make  formal  replies  to  such 

Vol.  ii.  1,  p.  318,  ed.  Migne),  survive  our  Lord,  or  even  the  times  of  His  public 
ministry. 

1  For  some  notices  of  these  objections,  see  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch.  § 
50,  p.  247. 

2  "Moreover,  when  I  was  a  child,"  says  the  historian,  "and  about  fourteen 
years  of  age,  I  was  commended  by  all  for  the  love  I  had  to  learning;  on  which 
account  the  high  priests  and  principal  men  of  the  city  came  then  frequently  to 
me  together,  iu  order  to  know  my  opinion  about  the  accurate  understanding  of 
points  of  the  law."  —  Life,  ch.  2,  Vol.  I.  p.  2  (Winston's  transl.).  Such  a  state- 
ment would  seem  inconceivable,  if  it  were  not  remembered  that  so  much,  espe- 
cially of  interpretation  of  the  law,  turned  on  opinion  and  modes  of  reasoning, 
rather  than  on  accumulations  of  actual  learning.  See  especially  Wotton,  Dis- 
courses, ch.  iv.  Vol.  i.  p.  24  sq. 

3  Much  has  been  said  by  a  certain  class  of  writers  about  the  want  of  proper 
care  for  the  Holy  Child  previously  evinced  by  Joseph  and  Mary.  Such  remarks 
are  as  untenable  as  they  are  clearly  designed  to  be  mischievous.  Even  Hase 
remarks  that  the  Lord's  staying  behind  in  Jerusalem  is  perfectly  conceivable 
without  attributing  any  carelessness  to  His  parents.  Lcben  Jesu,  §  30,  p.  55. 
Comp.  Tholuck,  Olnubicnrd,  p.  214  sq.  Bede  (in  loc.  Vol.  iii.  p.  349,  ed.  Migne) 
suggests  that  the  women  and  men  returned  in  different  bands,  and  that  Joseph 
and  Mary  each  thought  that  the  Holy  Child  was  with  the  other.  This,  however, 
seems  "  argutius  quain  verius  dictum." 


Lkct.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAX   MINISTRY.  99 

unmerited  cavillings.  I  will  only  presume  to  make  this 
one  mournful  comment,  —  that  if  a  narrative  like  the 
present,  so  full  as  it  is  of  life-like  touches,  so  exquisitely 
natural  in  its  details,  and  so  strangely  contrasted  with  the 
silly  fictions  of  the  Apocryphal  Infancies,1 — if  such  a 
narrative  as  this  is  to  be  regarded  as  legendary  or  myth- 
ical, then  we  may  indeed  shudderingly  recognize  what  is 
meant  by  the  "  evil  heart  of  unbelief"  what 

Jleb.  Hi.  12. 

it  is  to  have  that  mind  that  will  excogitate 
doubts  where  the  very  instinctive  feelings  repudiate  them, 
and  will  disbelieve  where  disbelief  becomes  plainly  mon- 
strous and  revolting. 

And  now  eighteen  years  of  the  Redeemer's  earthly  life 
pass  silently  away;2  a  deep  veil  falls  over  that 

-,  ,    .     i  i  t  Silence    of   the 

mysterious    period,  which    even    loving   and     Evamgennt  on  the 
inquiring  antiquity  has  not  presumed  to  raise,     ^g^gT 
save   in    regard  to  the  brief  notice    of  the 
Saviour's   earthly  calling   to   which    an    early  writer   has 
alluded,'5    and    to    which   both   national    custom   and   the 


1  The  simple  evangelical  narrative  of  our  Lord's  interview  with  the  Doctors 
has,  as  we  might  have  imagined,  called  forth  not  a  few  apocryphal  additions. 
These  will  be  found  iu  the  Evany.  Infant.  Arab.  cap.  50 — 52,  pp.  199,  200  (ed. 
Tiscb.). 

-'  This  would  seem  the  place,  in  accordance  with  the  arrangement  in  the  Gos- 
pel of  St.  Luke,  for  making  a  few  comments  on  the  genealogies  of  our  Lord  as 
recorded  in  this  Gospel  and  that  of  St.  Matthew.  Into  this  difficult  subject, 
however,  it  does  not  seem  desirable  to  enter,  further  than  to  remark  for  the 
benefit  of  the  general  reader,  (a)  that  the  most  exact  recent  research  tends  dis- 
tinctly to  prove  the  correctness  of  the  almost  universally  received  ancient 
opinion,  that  Imlli  arc  the  genealogies  of  our  Lord's  reputed  father ;  (b)  that  the 
genealogy  of  St.  Matthew  is  not  according  to  lineal  descent,  but  according  to 
the  line  of  regal  succession  from  Solomon,  and  that,  in  accordance  with 
national  and  scriptural  usage,  and  possibly  for  the  sake  of  facilitating  memory 
(.Mill,  p.  106),  it  is  recorded  in  an  abridged  and  also  symmetrical  form;  (c)that  the 
genealogy  of  St.  Luke  exhibits  the  natural  descent  from  David  through  Nathan  ; 
(</)  that  the  two  genealogies  can  be  reconciled  with  one  another,  and  with  the 
genealogy  of  the  house  of  David  preserved  in  the  Old  Testament.  For  a  com- 
pietc  substantiation  of  these  assertions,  see  Mill,  Obs.  on  Panthi  i*tie  Principles, 
ii.  2.  1,  2.  p.  101  sq.,  Ilervey  (Lord  A.)  Gent  alogies  of  our  Lord  (Cambr.  1853); 
and  compare  August.  <lc  Diversis  Qtuest.  lxi.  Vol.  vi.  p.  50,  and  contra  Faust. 
Manich.  in.  l  eq.  Vol.  viii.  p.  211  sq. 

"  See  above,  p.  97,  note  2. 


100  THE    EARLY   JUD^IAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

examples  of  the  greatest  teachers,  Hillel  not  excepted,1 
lend  considerable  plausibility. 

On  this  silence  much  has  been  said  into  which  it  is  here 
not  necessary  to  enter.     Instead  of  pensive 

Providential  na-  -.         .,.  .  .  .,,  111 

tun  of  this  silence  and  mistaken  longings,  it  should  be  to  us  a 
tSS  a"deX~    subject  of  rejoicing  and  thankfulness  that  in 

this  particular  portion  of  the  sacred  history 
Scripture  has  assumed  to  itself  its  prerogative  of  solemn 
reserve.2  Think  only,  brethren,  how  the  narrative  of 
simple  events  of  that  secluded  childhood  would  have  been 
dealt  with  by  the  scoffer  and  the  sceptic.  Nay,  pause  to 
think  only  what  an  effect  it  might  have  had  even  on  the 
better  portion  of  Christianity ;  how  our  weak  and  carnal 
hearts  might  have  dwelt  merely  on  the  human  side  of  the 
events  related,  and  how  hard  it  might  have  seemed  to 
have  realized  the  incarnate  God  in  the  simple  incidents 
of  that  early  life  of  duty  and  love.  I  ground  this  obser- 
vation on  the  very  suggestive  fact  recorded  by  St.  John, 

that  our  Lord's  brethren  "  did  not  believe  on 

Johnvii.5.  Tx.        „        XT  ,  _  . 

Him.  However  these  words  may  be  inter- 
preted; whether  the  word  "believe"  is  to  be  taken  in  a 
more  general  or  more  restricted  sense ;  whether  the 
brethren  be  regarded  as  sons  of  the  Virgin,  or,  as  I 
humbly  believe  them  to  be,  sons  of  Mary  her  sister,3  affects 


1  For  numerous  citations  from  the  Rabbinical  writers  confirming  the  above 
statement,  see  Sepp,  Leben  Christi,  1.  19,  Vol.  ii.  p.  59  sq.  The  quotation  in  refer- 
ence to  Hillel  is  as  follows:  "  Kum  forte  pauperior  eras  Hillele?  Dixerunt  de 
Hillele  seniore  quod  singulis  diebus  laborabat,  conductus  mercede  mummi."  — 
Tract  "  Joma,"  fol.  36.  1.    Compare  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  p.  444. 

2  A  brief  discussion  of  the  question  why  so  great  a  portion  of  our  Redeemer's 
life  is  thus  passed  over,  will  be  found  in  Spanheim,  Dub.  Evang.  xcvi.  Part  11. 
p.  651.  The  contrast  between  this  holy  silence  on  the  part  of  the  Evangelists, 
and  the  circumstantial  and  often  irreverent  narratives  of  some  of  the  apocryphal 
gospels,  especially  the  Pseudo-Matt.  Eva.nge.lvwm  and  the  Erring.  Infant. 
Arabicum),  is  singularly  striking  and  suggestive.  See  further  comments,  in 
Camb.  Essays,  1856,  p.  156  sq. 

3  Upon  this  vexed  question  we  will  here  only  pause  to  remark,  that  (he  whole 
subject  seems  to  narrow  itself  to  a  consideration  of  the  apparently  opposite 
deductions  that  have  been  made  from  two  important  texts.  On  the  one  hand, 
if  we  rest  solely  on  the  rigid  meaning  of  the  word  iirlffTevov  in  John  vii.  5,  and 
regard  oi  &5eAT>ol  avTov  as  including  all  so  designated,  it  would  certainly  seem 


LECT.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDJ3AN   MINISTRY.  101 

our  present  argument  but  little.  This  momentous  fact 
those  words  do  place  before  us,  that  some  of  those  who 
stood  in  the  relation  of  kinsmanship  and  affinity  to  the 
Saviour,  who  saw  Him  as  the  familiar  eye  saw  Him,  were 
among  the  latest  to  acquire  the  fullest  measures  of  faith. 
Though  so  many  blessed  opportunities  were  vouchsafed  to 
them  of  seeing  the  glory  of  God  shining  through  the  veil 
of  mortal  flesh,  yet  they  saw  it  not.  Their  eyes  so  rested 
on  the  outward  tabernacle  that  they  beheld  not  the 
Schechinah  within.  The  material  and  familiar  was  a 
hinderance  to  their  recognition  of  the  spiritual, —  a  hinder- 
ance,  be  it  not  forgotten,  which  in  their  case  was  ulti- 
mately removed,1  but  a  hinderance,  in  the  case  of  those 
who  could  not  have  their  advantages,  which  might  never 
have  been  removed,  an  obstacle  to  a  true  acknowledgment 


to  follow  that  none  of  them  could  be  apostles,  and  that  consequently  James  the 
brother  of  the  Lord  was  not  identical  with  James  the  son  of  Alphaius.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  we  adopt  the  only  sound  grammatical  interpretation  which  the 
winds  of  Gal.  i.  19  can  fairly  bear,  we  seem  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  James 
the  Lord's  brother  was  an  Apostle,  and  consequently  is  to  be  identified  with 
.hum  s  the  son  of  Alpheus.  If  this  be  so,  James  the  Apostle  and  his  brethren, 
owing  to  the  almost  certainly  established  identity  of  the  names  Alphaeus  and 
Clopaa  (Mill,  Observations,  n.  2.  3,  p.  23G),  must  be  further  identified  with  the 
children  of  Mary  (Matt,  xxvii.  50;  Mark  xv.  40)  the  wife  of  Clopas  and  sister 
of  our  Lord  (John  xix.  25),  and  so  His  cousins.  We  have  thus  two  texts  for 
consideration,  upon  the  correct  interpretation  of  which  the  question  mainly 
turns.  That  Gal.  i.  19  cannot  be  strained  to  mean  "I  saw  none  of  the  Apostles, 
but  I  saw  the  Lord's  brother,"  seems  almost  certain  from  the  regularly  exceptive 
use  which  el  /J-rj  appears  always  to  preserve  in  the  New  Testament  That  iirta- 
rtvov,  however,  in  John  vii.  5,  is  to  be  taken  in  the  barest  sense  of  the  word,  or  that 
oi  aSe\<pul  auTov  includes  all  so  named,  is  by  no  means  equally  clear.  Even  if 
ouk  iiziartvov  be  understood  in  a  sense  in  which  it  could  not  be  applied  to  an 
Apostle,  we  hare  still  two  of  the  a3eA<i>o!,  and  perhaps  more  (see  Mill),  who 
were  not  Apostles,  and  who,  with  the  sisters,  might  form  a  party  that  might 
reasonably  be  grouped  under  the  roughly  inclusive  expression  ol  a8e\(po\  avrov. 
For  further  information  and  references,  see  notes  on  Gal.  i.  20,  and  especially 
Mill,  ObaertfatiCfU,  n.  2.  3,  p.  221  sq. 

i  It  has  been  pertinently  observed  by  Neander,  that  for  this  very  reason  such 
men  are  to  be  accounted  still  more  trustworthy  witnesses.  The  very  fact  that 
they  who  so  long  resisted  the  impression  wrought  upon  thorn  by  our  Lord,  did 
at  last  yield,  and  acknowledge  Him  whom  they  accounted  but  as  an  unnoted 
relative  to  be  the  Messiah  and  the  Son  of  God,  makes  their  testimony  all  the 
more  valuable.    Sue  LebenJes.  Chr,  p.  49  (Transl.  p.  33). 

9* 


x£o-j 


<fc_ 


102  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

of  their  Lord's  divinity,  against  which  faith  might  never 
have  been  able  to  prevail. 

Much  again  has  been  said  upon  the  mental  and  spiritual 
development  of  the  Holy  Child  daring  these 

The  mental  and  r  .....  /. 

tpirituai  develop,  silent  years,  upon  which  it  is  equally  unprofit- 
able to  enlarge.1  Whatever  speculations  we 
may  in  passive  and  meditative  moments  indulge  in  with 
regard  to  those  silent  years,  let  us  hold  this  as  most  fixed 
and  irrefragably  true,  that  our  heavenly  Master  received 
nothing  affecting  His  divine  purpose  and  mission  from  the 
influences  of  even  the  purer  and  more  spiritual  teaching 
of  those  around  Him.  With  what  startling  temerity  has 
the  converse  statement  been  urged  and  accepted;2  and 
yet  is  there  not  tacit  blasphemy  in  the  very  thought? 
What  was  there  for  example  in  Pharisaism  which  could 
have  had  its  influence  on  Him  who  so  spake  against  every 
principle  that  marked  it  ?  What  was  there  in  the  anti- 
eudaemonism,3  as  it  has  been  termed,  —  the  desire  placidly 
to  do  good  for  its  own  sake,  which  has  been  attributed  to 

1  This  subject  and  the  probable  "plan"  of  our  Saviour's  ministry  are  topics 
which  most  of  the  modern  lives  of  our  Lord  discuss  with  a  very  unbecoming 
freedom.  See  Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §  31,  40  sq.,  pp.  56,  69  sq.  In  reference  to  the 
former,  and  to  the  true  nature  of  our  Lord's  advance  in  -wisdom,  enough  has 
been  said  above  (p.  91,  note  1);  in  reference  to  the  latter  it  may  be  sufficient  to 
say,  simply  and  briefly,  that  the  only  principle  of  action  by  which  man  may  pre- 
sume to  believe  the  Eternal  Son  to  have  been  influenced  was  love  toward  man, 
cooperating  with  obedience  to  the  will  of  the  Father  (Heb.  x.  9),  —  of  Him  with 
■whom  He  Himself  was  one  (John  x.  30).  Comp.  Ullmann,  Unsundlichkeit  Jesu, 
sect.  iv.  p.  25  (Transl.  by  Park).  Further  remarks  will  be  found  in  Keander, 
Life  of  Christ,  Book  iv.  p.  80  sq.  (Bohn). 

2  The  various  sources  to  which  ancient  and  modern  sceptical  writers  have 
presumed  to  refer  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  our  Lord's  teaching  are  speci- 
fied by  Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §  31,  p.  57. 

3  See  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  38  (Bohn);  and  compare  Jost,  Gesch.  des 
Judenthums,  n.  2.  8,  Vol.  i.  p.  215.  The  sentiment  ascribed  to  the  so-called 
fouuder  of  this  sect  is  found  in  the  Mishna  (Tract,  "  I'iike  Aboth,"  I.  3),  and  is 
to  this  effect:  "  Be  not  as  servants  who  serve  their  master  on  the  condition  of 
receiving  a  reward;  but  be  as  servants  who  serve  on  no  such  condition,  and  let 
the  fear  of  heaven  be  in  you."  It  must  be  observed,  however,  that  though  the 
above  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  principles  of  early  and  even  later  Saddu- 
ca'ism,  the  connection  of  the  sect  with  Sadok,  and  of  its  doctrines  with  perver- 
sions of  the  original  teaching  of  Antigonus  Socho,  is  clearly  to  be  regarded  as  a 
very  questionable  hypothesis.  See  Winer,  TtWR.  art.  " Sadduc'ler,"  Vol.  ii.  p. 
352  sq. 


Lect.  III.  THE    EARLY   JUD2EAN   MINISTRY.  103 

the  original  creed  of  the  Sadducee, — that  could  for  one 
instant  be  thought  to  have  been  assimilated  by  Him  who 
came  to  save  His  own  creatures  with  His  sufferings  and 
His  blood,  and  whose  ever-operative  and  redemptive  love 
was  the  living  protest  against  the  coldness  and  deadness 
of  a  merely  formal  or  self-complacent  morality?  What, 
lastly,  was  there  in  the  much-vaunted  spirit  of  Essene 
teaching  that  we  can  trace  in  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ  ?] 
What  was  there  in  the  spiritual  pride  of  that  secluded 
sect  that  sceptical  criticism  shall  think  it  can  discern  in 
the  active,  practical,  all-embracing  covenant  of  Love  ? 
No,  it  cannot  be.  No  finite  human  influences  gave  tinge 
to  those  eternal  purposes.  No  doctrines  and  traditions  of 
men  added  aught  to  the  spiritual  development  of  the  Holy 
Child   of  Nazareth.     From   that   Father   in 

John  i.  18. 

whose  bosom  He  had  been  from  all  eternity, 
—  from  the  fulness  of  that  Godhead  of  which  He  Himself 
was  a  copartner,  —  unmingled  and  uncontaminated,  came 
all  forms  of  that  wisdom  in  which,  as  man,  and  as  subject 
to  the  laws  ami  developments  of  man's  nature,  the  omnis- 
cient Son  of  God  vouchsafed  to  advance  and  to  make 
progress. 

Thus,  O  mystery  of  mysteries,  in  that  green  basin  in  the 
hills  of  Galilee,2  amid  simple  circumstances,  and  perchance 


1  The  connection  of  Christianity  with  Essene  teaching  has  always  heen  the 
most  popular  of  these  theories.  Comp.  lleubner  on  Reinhard's  Plan  Jesu, 
Append,  v.  How  little  similarity,  however,  there  really  is  between  the  two  bj  b- 
tems,  and  how  fundamental  the  differences,  is  clearly  enough  shown  by  Neander, 
I. if,  Qf  (  In-isl.  p.  88  (Bonn).  For  contemporary  notices  of  the  habits  ami  tenets 
of  this  Beet.  Bee  Philo,  Quod  Omn.  Prob.  §  12,  Vol.  ii.  i>.  -157,  ib.  fie  VU.  Oonti  mpl. 
i  i.  Vol.  ii.  p.  471  (ed.  Mang.),  and  Joseph.  Antiq.  xm.  5.  9,  xvi.  1.  ">.  Bell.  Jvd. 
H.8.2  sq  ,  and  tor  a  general  estimate  of  the  characteristics  of  Essene  teaching 
and  its  relations  to  Pharisaism,  Jost,  Ocsch.  des  Judenth.  n.  2.  8,  Vol.  i.  p.  2D7  sq. 

2  "The  town  of  Nazareth  lies  upon  the  western  side  of  a  narrow  oblong 
BBSin,  extending  about  from  S.S.W.  to  N.X.E.,  perhaps  twenty  minutes  in 
length   bj  eighl   or  ten   in   breadth.     The  houses  stand  on  the  lower  part  of  the 

slope  of  the  western  hill,  which  rises  high  and  sleep  above  them Towards 

the  north  the  bills  are  less  high;  on  the  east  and  south  they  are  low.  Ill  the 
gOUth-east  the  basin  contracts,  and  a  valley  runs  out,  narrow  and  winding, 
apparently  to  the  great  plain.''  —  Robinson,  /'"/>  stine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  838  (ed.  2).  See 
al  o  i  homson,  The  Land  ■unl  t/i>  /;.»</.-,  Vol.  ii.  p.  181. 


10-1  THE   EARLY  JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

in  the  exercise  of  a  humble  calling,  dwelt  the  everlasting 
Son   of  God,  —  the  varied    features  of  that 

The   secluded  . 

youth  of  the  son  of    nature  which  lie  Himself  had  made  so  fair, 

the  permitted  media  of  the  impressions  of 

outward   things.1     His    oratory   the    solitary   mountains ; 

His  purpose  the  salvation  of  our  race  ;  His  will  the  will 

of  God.     Thus  silently  and  thus  mysteriously  pass  away 

those  eighteen  years,  until  at  length  the  hour  is  come,  and 

the  voice  of  the  mystic  Elias  is  now  heard  sounding  in  the 

deserts,  and  preparing  the  way  for  Him  that  was  to  come. 

On  the  ministry  of  the  Baptist  my  limits  will  permit  me 

to  say  but  little.     It  Avould   seem  to   have 

The  ministry  of  "* 

the  Baptist,  and  its     preceded  that  of  our  Lord  by  some  months, 

probable  effects.  .  , 

and  not  improbably  occupied  the  greater 
portion  of  the  Sabbatical  year,  which  came  to  its  conclu- 
sion three  or  four  months  before  our  Lord  had  completed 
His   thirtieth    year.2      The    effects   of   the    Forerunner's 

ministry  seem  to  have   been   of  a  mingled 

Matt.  Hi.  7.  J  & 

character.  That  St.  John  found  some  partial 
adherents  among  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees3  seems  cer- 

1  For  a  notice  of  the  fair  view  that  must  have  met  the  Saviour's  eye  whenever 
He  ascended  the  western  hill,  specified  in  the  preceding  note,  see  Robinson,  Pal- 
estine, Vol.  II.  p.  336  sq.,  and  comp.  the  photographic  view  of  Frith,  Egypt, 
etc.,  Part  n. 

2  We  have  no  data  for  fixing  the  time  when  the  ministry  of  the  Baptist  com- 
menced, unless  we  urge  Luke  iii.  1,  which,  as  we  shall  see  below  (p.  106,  note  1), 
is  more  plausibly  referred  to  another  period  of  his  history.  We  are  thus  thrown 
on  conjectures;  the  most  probable  of  winch  seems  that  as  St.  John  was  born  six 
months  before  our  Lord,  so  he  might  have  preceded  Him  in  his  public  ministra- 
tions by  a  not  much  greater  space  of  time.  The  further  chronological  fact  (see 
Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  p.  204),  that  from  the  autumn  of  779  a.  u.  o.  to  the 
autumn  of  780  was  a  sabbatical  year,  is  certainly  significant,  and  may  addition- 
ally incline  us  to  the  opinion  that  perhaps  in  the  spring  or  summer  of  780  a.  u.  c. 
St.  John's  voice  was  first  heard  in  the  wilderness  of  Judaa.  For  notices  of  the 
outward  circumstances  under  which  the  Forerunner  appeared,  the  student  may 
be  referred  to  Spanheim,  Bub.  Erang.  xcvn.— c.  Part  II.  654  sq.,  Huxtable, 
Ministry  of  St.  John,  p.  8  sq.  (Lond.  1848),  and  the  exhaustive  dissertation  of 
Patritius,  de  Evang.  xliii.  Book  in.  p.  439  sq. 

3  The  supposition  that  the  members  of  these  sects  came  to  oppose  the  baptism 
of  St.  John  is  just  grammatically  possible  (see  Meyer  in  loc),  but  wholly  con- 
trary to  the  spirit  of  the  context.  They  might  have  come  with  unworthy 
motives,  from  excited  feelings,  or  from  curiosity,  but  certainly  not  as  direct 
opponents.    See  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  51  sq.  (Bohn).    Clin  sostom  perhaps 


Lkct.  HI.  THE   EARLY  JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  105 

tain  from  the  express  words  of  St.  Matthew  ;  and  that  two 
years  after  his  death  he,  whom  his  Master  had  pronounced 
as   anions:  the  greatest  of  the  prophets,  was 

i  iiiii  Luke  vO.  SB. 

to  a  great  degree   regarded   as  such   by  the 

fickle  multitude  at  large,  seems  equally  certain   from  the 

Gospel  narrative.     Yet  that  the  Pharisees  as 

i       i  •  i     i  •  i  ■  ii  i  Mark  xi.  32. 

a  body  rejected  his  teaching,  and  that  the 
effect  on  the  great  mass  of  the  people  was  but  partial  and 
transitory,  seems  certain  from  our  Lord's  own  comments 
on  the  generation  that  would  not  dance  to  those  that  piped 
unto  them,1  and  would  not  lament  with  those 
that  mourned.     We   may  with  reason,  then,       fu*e ttf.  a& 
believe  that  the  harbinger's  message  might 
have  arrested,  aroused,  and  awakened ;  but  that  the  gen- 
eral influence  of  that  baptism  of  water  was  comparatively 
limited,  and  that  its  memory  would  have  soon  died  away 
if  lie  that  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fii*e 
had  not  invested  it  with  a  new  and  more  vital  significance. 
John  struck  the  first  chords,  but  the  sounds  would  have 
soon   died   out  into  silence  if  a  mightier  hand  had  not 
swept  the  yet  vibrating  strings.2 


goes  too  far  tlie  other  way  when  lie  says,  oude  yap  a/.iapTau6i/Tas  elSev  aWa 
fifTafiaWofifvovs.  —  Horn,  in  Matt.  xi.  Vol.  vii.  p.  173  (ed.  Bened.  2). 

1  This  is  also  shown  clearly  by  the  remark  of  our  Lord  to  the  Jews  on  their 
general  reception  of  the  Baptist's  message,  Tj^eK^crare  ayakKia^rjvai  irphs 
tlipav  iv  Tip  <pun\  aviou,  John  v.  35,  where,  though  the  chief  emphasis  probably 
rests  on  the  (ryaAAia^rjecu  (as  opp.  to  ixeravoriaai,  see  Meyer  in  loc.),  the  irpbs 
wpav  is  not  without  its  special  force:  "It  marks,"  as  Chrysostom  says,  "their 
light-mindedness,  and  the  quick  way  in  which  they  fell  hack  from  him."  Com- 
pare tno  Matt,  xxi.  32,  though  this  perhaps  more  especially  applies  to  those 
(oi  apx'fpf'ts  ical  ol  Trpeo-fiuTtpot  too  Xaov,  ver.  23)  to  whom  our  Lord  was 
immediately  speaking.  On  the  effect  of  the  Baptist's  preaching  compare, 
though  with  some  reserve,  the  well  expressed  estimate  of  Mihnan,  History  of 
Christianity,  i.  3,  Vol.  i.  p.  143  s<j. 

2  This  is  the  ancient,  anil,  as  it  would  seem,  correct  view  of  the  relations  of  the 
mini-try  of  Christ  to  that  of  His  forerunner.  Though  on  the  one  hand  we 
must  not  rashly  dissociate  what  undoubtedly  stood  in  close  relation  to  one 
another,  we  still  can  scarcely  go  BO  far  on  the  other  as  to  say  that  St.  John  was 
'•absolutely   the  Counterpart,  and   merely   the  forerunner  of  Christ "  ((in-swell, 

Dissert,  xix.  Vol.  ii.  p.  156).  The  difference  between  St.  John's  baptism  and 
Christian,  though  treated  as  a  needless  question  by  Jackson  ( Oe<  d,  vn.  -11,  Vol. 
\  i   p.  880),  often  occupied  the  attention  of  the  early  Chinch,  and  has  never  been 


106  THE    EARLY   JTJDJEAN    MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

It  was  now  probably  towards  the  close  of  the  year  of 
the    City    780,1    after    more    than    the    time 

Jovrncy  of  our 

Lord  to  the  Bap-     allotted  to  the  Levite's  preparation  for  "  the 

Usui  of  John.  .  .     .  „    ,       ,       ,  . 

service  ot  the  ministry     had  already  passed 

Ifumb.iv. 

away,"  that  the  Holy  Jesus,  moved,  we  may 
humbly  presume,  by  that  Spirit  which  afterwards  directed 


better  stated  than  by  Gregory  of  Nazianzus :  "  John  also  baptized,  not,  however, 
any  longer  after  a  Jewish  manner,  tor  he  baptized,  not  with  water  only,  but 
unto  repentance.  Still  it  was  not  yet  after  a  spiritual  manner,  for  he  adds  not, 
'  with  the  Spirit.'  Jesus  baptizes  also,  but  it  is  with  the  .Spirit."  —  Orat.  xxxix. 
p.  634  (Paris,  1609).  See  August,  contr.  Litt.  Petil.  n.  32.  75,  ATol.  ix.  p.  284  (ed. 
Migue),  where  the  erroneous  opinions  of  that  schismatica)  bishop  on  this  head 
are  very  clearly  exposed.  Comp.  also  Thorndike,  Laws  of  the  Church,  ill.  7.  4, 
Vol.  iv.  1,  p.  149  sq.  (A.-C.  Libr.). 

1  This  date,  it  need  scarcely  be  said,  like  all  the  dates  in  our  Redeemer's  history, 
is  open  to  much  discussion.  It  has  been  selected  after  a  prolonged  consideration 
of  the  various  opinions  that  have  been  recently  adduced,  and  certainly  seems 
plausible.  If,  as  we  have  supposed,  our  Lord  was  bom  towards  the  close  of 
January  or  beginning  of  February,  A.  u.  c.  750,  He  would  now  be  thirty  years 
old  and  some  months  over,  an  age  well  coinciding  with  the  oxrel  iriov  rpia- 
KovTa  apxiifJ-svos  of  Luke  iii.  23.  The  only  difficulty,  and  it  is  confessedly  a 
great  one,  is  the  date  previously  specified  by  Luke,  ch.  iii.  1,  the  fifteenth  year 
of  the  reign  of  Tiberius.  If  we  take  the  first  and  apparently  plain  sense  of  the 
words,  this  fifteenth  year  can  only  be  conceived  to  date  back  from  the  regular 
accession  of  Tiberius  at  the  death  of  Augustus,  and  will  consequently  coincide 
with  a.u.c.  781,  —  a  date  which  not.  only  involves  the  awkwardness  of  positively 
forcing  us  to  extend  the  age  of  our  Lord  to  thirty-one  or  more,  to  make  His  birth 
precede  the  death  of  Herod  (certainly  April,  A.u.c.  750),  but  also  forces  us  to 
shorten  the  duration  of  His  ministry  very  unduly  to  bring  His  death  either  to 
the  year  a.  d.  29  or  a.  d.  30,  which  seem  the  only  ones  that  fairly  satisfy  the 
astronomical  elements  which  have  been  introduced  into  the  question  by  Warm 
(Astrom.  Beitrage)  and  others.  We  must  choose,  then,  between  two  modes  of 
obviating  the  difficulty;  either,  (a)  with  Greswcll  (Distiert.  VII.  Vol.  i.  p.  Sot  sq.) 
ami  others,  we  must  suppose  the  fifteen  years  to  include  two  years  during  which 
Tiberius  appears  to  have  been  associated  with  Augustus,  —  a  mode  of  dating, 
however,  both  unlikely  and  unprecedented  (see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Syn.  p.  172, 
Browne,  Ovdo  Sa>c.  §  71,  p.  76  sq.);  or  {b)  we  must  conceive  the  fifteenth  of  Tibe- 
rius to  coincide,  not  with  the  first  appearance,  but  the  captivity  of  John  t lie 
Baptist,  —  the  epoch,  be  it  observed,  from  which,  in  accordance  with  ancient 
tradition  (Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  24),  the  narrative  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels 
appears  to  date  (Matt.  iv.  12,  17;  Mark  i.  14).  This  latter  view  lias  been  well 
supported  by  Wieseler  (Chron.  Syn.  p.  172  sq.),  and  adopted  by  Tischendorf 
[Synops.  Evang.  p.  xiv.  sq.),  and  is,  perhaps,  slightly  the  most  probable.  The 
opinion  of  Sanclemente  and  Browne  (§  85)  that  the  fifteenth  of  Tiberius  was  the 
year  of  Passion,  has  much  less  in  its  favor. 

2  The  meaning  of  the  words  (Wei  itwv  rpiaKovra  apxofJ.evos  (Luke  iii.  23)  has 
been  much  discussed;  the  doubt  being  whether  the  participle  is  to  be  referred  (<() 
tci  the  age  specified  ("incipiebat  esse  quasi  annoruui  triginta,"  Beza,  Greswell),  or 
[b)  to  the  commencement  of  the  ministry.     Whichever  position  of  apx^iw*  we 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  107 

His  feet  to  the  wilderness,  leaves  the  home  of  His  child- 
hood, to  return  to  it  no  more  as  His  earthly  abode,  save 
for  the  few  days1  that  preceded  the  removal  to  Caper- 
naum in  the  spring  of  the  following  year.  It  was  now 
winter,2  and  the  valley  of  Esdraelon  was  just  green  with 
springing  corn,3  as  the  Redeemer's  path  lay  across  it 
toward  the  desert  valley  of  the  Jordan,  either  to  that  an- 
cient ford  near  Succoth,  which  recent  geographical  specu- 

adopt  (see  Tischendorf,  in  loc.)  it  cnn  scarcely  be  doubted  that  (b)  is  tbc  correct 
interpretation  (so  Origen  and  F.uthym.),  and  that  our  Lord's  ministr)  is  to  be 
understood  to  have  commenced  when  he  was  more  than  thirty, but  less  than 
thirty-one  years  of  age.  For  arguments  (not  very  strong)  in  favor  of  icrel  imply- 
ing, not  somewhat  above,  but  somewhat  under,  the  time  specified,  sec  Greswell, 
Dissert,  xi.  Vol.  i.  p.  868. 

l  When  our  Lord  returned  to  Galilee  after  tbc  Temptation,  it  would  seem  that 
for  the  short  time  that  preceded  the  passover  lie  did  not  stay  at  Nazareth,  but  at 
Capernaum.  See  John  ii.  12.  On  His  next  return  to  Galilee  (December,  A.  U.  C. 
781),  He  appears  to  have  gone  to  and  perhaps  stayed  at  Cana  (John  iv.  40),  a 
place  to  which  some  writers  have  supposed  that  the  Virgin  and  her  kindred  had 
previously  retired.  See  Ewald,  Gesclt.  Christus,  Vol.  v.  p.  147.  Under  any  circum- 
stances we  have  only  a  short  period  remaining  before  the  final  removal  to  Caper- 
naum, specified  Matt.  iv.  13,  Luke  iv.  31. 

'■i  The  conclusion  at  which  Wieseler  arrives  after  a  careful  consideration  of  all 
the  historical  data  that  tend  to  fix  the  time  of  our  Lord's  baptism,  is  as  follows  : 
Jesus  must  have  been  baptized  by  John  not  curlier  than  February,  780  A.  p.  o. 
(the  extreme  "  terminus  a  quo  "  supplied  by  .">t.  Luke),  nor  later  than  the  winter 
of  the  same  year  (tin-  extreme  "  terminus  ad  quern  "  supplied  by  St.  John).  See 
t'liriiii.  Synops.  ii.  B.  2,  p.  2lll.  Wieseler  himself  fixes  upon  the  spring  or  sum- 
mer of  780  A.  u.  0.  as  the  exact  date  (p.  202);  but  to  this  period  there  are  two 
objections:  First,  that  if,  as  seems  reasonable,  we  agree  (with  "Wieseler)  to  fix 
the  deputation  to  the  Baptist  (John  i.  19  sip)  about  the  close  of  February,  7S1 
a.  p.  c,  we  shall  have  a  period  of  eight  months,  viz.  from  the  middle  of  780  to 
the  end  of  the  second  month  of  781,  wholly  unaccounted  for  (Wieseler,  <'/m>i>. 
Synops.  p.  258);  secondly,  thai  it  is  almost  the  unanimous  tradition  of  the  early 
church  that  the  baptism  of  our  Lord  took  place  in  winter,  or  in  the  early  part  of 
tin-  year.  See  the  numerous  ancient  authorities  in  the  useful  table  of  l'atritius, 
DiSSi  rl.  xix.  Hook  in.  p.  270,  and  comp.  Diss,  xlvii.  p.  4S5.  The  tradition  of  the 
Basilideane,  mentioned  by  clement  of  Alexandria  [Strom,  i.  21.  Vol.  i.  p.  408,  ed. 
Pott),  that  the  baptism  of  our  Lord  took  place  on  the  eleventh  or  fifteenth  of 
Tybi  (Jan.  6  or  10),  deserves  consideration,  both  from  the  antiquity  of  the  sect, 
and  from  the  fact  that  the  baptism  of  our  Lord  was  in  their  system  an  epoch  of 
the  highest  importance.  See  Neander,  Church  llist.  Vol.  ii.  p.  102  (Clark).  The 
ordinary  objections  founded  on  the  Beason  of  the  year  are  well  and,  as  it  would 
hub,  convincingly  answered  by  GreswelJ,  Dissert,  xi.  Vol.  i.  p.  :171  (ed.  2). 

8 The  harvest  in  Palestine  ripens  at  different  times  in  different  localities;  but 

■S  a  general  rule  the  barley  harvest   may  be  considered  as  taking  place  from  the 

middle  to  the  close  of  April,  and  the  wheat  harvest  about  a  fortnight  later.    See 

Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  401  (ed.  2),  and  compare  Stanley, Palestine,  p. 

1.2). 


108  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

lation1   has    connected    with    the    Bethabara    or    rather 
Bethany  of  St.  John,  or  more  probably  to  the  neighbor- 
hood of  that  more  southern  ford  not  far  from  Jericho, 
round  which  traditions  yet  linger,2  and  to  which  the  mul- 
titudes  that    flocked    to   the   Baptist    from 
Judaea  and  Jerusalem  would   have  found  a 
speedier  and  more  convenient  access.      There  the  great 
Forerunner  was  baptizing;    there  he  had   been  but  just 
uttering  those  words  of  stern  warning  to  the 
Luke  m.  i.         mingled  multitude,  to  Pharisee  and  to  Sad- 
Matt.ui.i.         ducee,3  which  are  recorded  by  the  first  and 
third  Evangelists ;  there  stood  around   him 
men  with    musing    hearts,  doubting   whether   that   bold 
speaker  were  the  Christ  or  no,  when  suddenly, 

Luke  Hi.  15.  ._ 

unknown  and  unrecognized,  the  very  Mes- 
siah mingles  with  those  strangely-assorted  and  expectant 
multitudes,  and  with  them  seeks  baptism  at  the  hands  of 
the  great  Preacher  of  the  desert. 

It  has  been  doubted  whether  that  lonely 

john-"nrec»g°niuln     child  of  the  wilderness  at  once  recognized  the 
a/ our  Lord.  Holy  Qne  that  wag  nQW  raeekiy  standing  be- 

fore him.     It  is,  at  any  rate,  certain,  from  his  own  words, 


1  See  Stanley,  Palestine,  p.  308,  who  both  pleads  for  the  reading  Bethabara, 
and  for  the  more  northern  position  of  the  scene  of  the  baptism.  With  regard  to 
the  reading,  at  any  rate,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt.  All  the  ancient 
authorities  and  nearly  all  the  MSS.  in  the  time  of  Origen  ({rx^bv  Travra  to 
avTiypcupa)  adopt  the  reading  Bethany ;  nor  would  Bethabara  have  ever  found  a 
place  in  the  sacred  text,  if  Origen,  moved  by  geographical  considerations,  had 
not  given  sanction  to  the  change.  See  Liicke,  Comment,  uber  Joh.  i.  28,  and  the 
critical  notes  of  Teschendorf,  in  loc. 

2  The  traditional  sites  adopted  by  the  Latin  and  Greek  churches  are  not  the 
same,  but  both  not  far  from  Jericho.  The  bathing-place  of  the  Latin  pilgrims  is 
not  far  from  the  ruined  convent  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  that  of  the  Greek  pil- 
grims two  or  three  miles  below  it.  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  536.  The 
objection  to  the  latter,  and  possibly  to  the  former  place,  is  the  steepness  of  the 
banks  (see  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  445),  but  this  cannot  be 
strongly  pressed,  as  at  the  assumed  time  of  year  (when,  as  we  learn  from  Robin- 
son [Vol.  i.  p.  541],  the  river  has  not  yet  been  seen  by  travellers)  partial  or 
local  overflows  might  have  given  greater  facilities  for  the  performance  of  the 
ceremony.  See  Greswell,  Dissert,  xix.  Vol.  ii.  p.  1S4.  See,  however,  Thomson, 
The  Land  and  the  Bool:,  Vol.  ii.  p.  452  sq. 

3  See  above,  p.  104,  note  3. 


Lkct.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  109 

that  his  knowledge  of  our  Lord  as  the  Messiah  was  not  due 
to  a  previous  acquaintance,1  and  it  is  also  quite  possible 
that  he  might  not  have  known  his  Redeemer  even  by  out- 
ward appearance.     But  if  he  knew  him  not  by  the  seeing 
of  the  eye,  he  must  have  known  of  Him  by  the  hearing  of 
the  ear,  and  he  must  have  felt  within  his  soul,  as  the  Lord 
drew  nigh,  a  sudden  and  mystic  intimation  that  he  was  gaz- 
ing on  Him  of  whose  wondrous  birth  his  own  mother's  lips 
must  oft  have  told  him,  and  on  whose  future  destinies  he 
might  often  have  mused  with  a  profound  and  all  but  con- 
sciously-prophetic interest.2    With  strange  memories  in  his 
thoughts,  and    perhaps  now  still   stranger   presentiments 
in  his  heart,  the  Baptist  pleads  against  such 
an  inverted  relation  as  the  Son  of  Mary  seek- 
ing baptism  from  the  son  of  Elisabeth.     He 
pleads;  but   he   pleads   in  vain.      Overper- 
snaded  and  awed  by  the  solemn  words  which  he  might  not 


1  This  view,  which  is  substantially  that  taken  by  the  older  commentators,  has 
been  well  defended  by  Dr.  Mill,  against  the  popular  sceptical  objections.  See  Obss. 
an  Pantheistic  Principles,  H.  1.  5,  p.  79  sq.  We  certainly  seem  to  gather  from 
the  language  of  St.  Matthew  that  the  Baptist  recognized  our  Lord,  if  not  dis- 
tinctly as  the  Messiah,  yet  in  a  degree  closely  approaching  to  it,  before  the  bap- 
tism, —  for  otherwise  how  are  we  to  understand  the  language  of  Matt.  iii.  14? 
Bee  especially  Chrysost.  inJoann.  Horn.  xvi.  Whether  this  was  due  to  a  short 
unrecorded  conversation  (Mill),  or,  as  suggested  in  the  text,  to  special  revelation 
(ovk  air'  avdpanriv7)s  <pt\ias  i\v  a'vin  [rj  /.laprvpia],  a\\'  e'£  airoKahvipews, 
Ammonius.  ap.  Cramer,  Cat  en.  in  toe),  cannot  be  decided.  The  facts  at  any 
rate,  as  specified  by  the  two  Evangelists,  are  perfectly  compatible  with  each 
other:  mi  the  one  band,  St.  John  <Ud  recognize  our  Lord,  just  before  the  bap- 
tism (Matt.  /.  c.)\  on  the  other  hand,  he  himself  declares  (John  /.  c.)  that  his  per- 
sonal acquaintance,  if  such  existed,  was  not  in  any  degree  concerned  in  his 
subsequent  complete  recognition  of  Him  as  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  So 
rightly  De  Wette,  on  John,  I.  i\,  and  similarly  Iluxtable,  Ministry  of  St.  John, 
p.  60. 

-'  It  has  been  well  observed  by  Mill,  that  ''the  designation  to  which  he  bore 
testimony  unconsciously  in  the  womb,  and  which  his  mother,  with  entire  con- 
sciousness of  its  meaning,  expressed  reverently  to  the  Virgin  Mother  of  her 
I. oi  .I.  cannot  have  been  kept  secret  from  his  earliest  years;  and  however  the 
memory  of  the  wonderful  fads  in  question  might  fade,  as  would  naturally  be 
the  case,  from  the  minds  of  many  that  heard  them,  ....  the  tradition  of  them 
could  not  possibly  thus  pass  away  from  him.  Nor  would  his  solitary  life  in  the 
desert,  apart  from  his  kindred,  as  from  mankind  in  general,  tend  to  impair  the 
'•tion,  but  to  strengthen  it."  —  Observations  on  Panth.  Principles,  n.  1.  ">, 
p.  BO 

10 


110  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

have  fully  understood,  the  Forerunner  descends  with  his 
Redeemer  into  the  rapid  waters  of  the  now  sacred  river; 
when    lo,  when  the  inaugural  rite  is  done,  the  promised 
sign  at  length  appears,  the  Baptist  beholds   the    opened 
heavens,  and  the  embodied  form1  of  the  de- 
scending Spirit ;  he  sees,  perhaps,  the  kindled 
fire,  apt  symbol  of  the  Redeemer's  baptism,  of  which  an 
old  writer  has  made  mention  ;2  he  hears  the 
Father's  voice  of  blessing:  and  love:  he  sees 

John  i.  34.  °  ' 

and  hears,  and,  as  he  himself  tells  us,  bears 
witness  that  this  is  verily  the  Son  of  God. 

And  now  all  righteousness  has  been  fulfilled.     Borne 

away,  as  it  would  seem  at  once,  by  the  motions 
«?£?££  of  the  Spirit,  either  to  that  lonely  and  unex- 
nature  and  drcum-     plorec]  chain  of  desert  mountains  of  which 

stances.  * 

Nebo  has  been  thought  to  form  a  part,  or  to 
„,  . .  ,„  that  steep  rock  on  this  side   of  the  Jordan 

Mark  i.  13.  L 

which  tradition  still  points  out;3  there,  amid 
the  wild  beasts  of  the  thickets  and  the  caverns,  in  hunger 


1  The  following  is  the  ancient  tradition  referred  to  :  "And  then  when  Jesus  came 
to  the  river  Jordan,  where  John  was  baptizing,  and  descended  to  the  water,  a 
fire  was  kindled  over  the  Jordan."  —  Justin  Martyr,  Trypho,  cap.  88,  Vol.  ii.  p. 
302  (ed.  Otto).  So  also,  somewhat  similarly,  Epiphanius,  Holt.  xxx.  13,  and  the 
writer  of  a  treatise,  de  Baptismo  Hcereticorum,  prefixed  to  the  works  of  Cyprian 
(p.  30,  ed.  Oxon.),  who  alludes  to  the  tradition  as  mentioned  in  the  apocryphal 
and  heretical  Paidi  Prasdicatio.  Something  like  it  has  been  noticed  in  the 
Oracula  Sibylla  (vn.  83)  in  Galland.  Bibl.  Vet.  Patr.  Vol.  i.  p.  387  c. 

2  The  distinct  language  of  St.  Luke,  ffw/xariKw  ffSei  oxrei  irepiffTepaf  (ch.  iii. 
22),  must  certainly  preclude  our  accepting  any  explanatory  gloss,  referring  the 
holy  phenomenon  to  light  shining  "  with  the  rapid  and  undulating  motion  of  a 
dove "  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  I.  3,  Vol.  i.  p.  151).  The  form  was  real. 
For  the  opinions  of  antiquity  on  the  manifestation  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  tin's 
peculiar  form,  see  the  learned  work  of  the  eloquent  Jesuit,  Barradius,  Comment, 
in  Harmon.  I.  15,  Vol.  ii.  p.  48  (Antw.  1617). 

3  The  place  which  the  most  current  tradition  has  fixed  on  as  the  site  of  the 
Temptation  is  the  mountain  Quarantana,  which  Robinson  describes  as  "  an 
almost  perpendicular  wall  of  rock,  twelve  or  fifteen  hundred  feet  above  the 
plain." —  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  567  (ed.  2).  Compare  Thomson,  Tlie  Land  and  the 
Boul:,  Vol.  ii.  p.  450.  It  has  been  asserted  by  Robinson  that  this  tradition  does 
not  appear  to  be  older  than  the  time  of  the  Crusades,  but  see  Mill,  Sermons  on 
the  Temptation,  p.  166.  The  supposition  in  the  text  seems  better  to  accord  with 
the  probable  locality  assigned  to  the  baptism,  but  must  be  regarded  as  purely 
conjectural. 


Lect.  in.  THE   EARLY  JTJDJEAN   MINISTRY.  Ill 

and  loneliness,  the  now  inaugurated  Messiah  confronts  in 
spiritual  conflict  the  fearful  adversary  of  His  kingdom  and 
of  that  race  which  He  came  to  save.     On  the  deep  secrets 
of  those  mysterious  forty  days  it  is  not  meet  that  specula- 
tion should  dwell.     If  we  had  only  the  narrative  of  St. 
Matthew,  we  might  think  that  Satanic  temp- 
tation only  presumed  to  assail  the  Holy  One 
when   hunger   had    weakened    the   energies   of   the   now 
exhausted  body.     If,  again,  we  had  only  the  gospels  of  St. 
Mark  and  St.  Luke,  we  might  be  led  to  con-         cn.i.iz. 
elude  that  the  struggle  with  the  powers  of         cu.iv.-2. 
darkness  extended  over  the  whole  period  of  that  length- 
ened fast.   From  both,  however,  combined,  we  may  perhaps 
venture  to  conclude  that  those  three  concentrated  forms 
of  Satanic  daring,  which  two  Evangelists  have  been  moved 
to  record,  presented  themselves  only  at  the  close  of  that 
season   of  mysterious  trial.1     Upon    the   three   forms  of 
temptation,  and  their  attendant  circumstances,  my  limits 
will  not  permit  me  to  enlarge.     These  three  remarks  only 
will  I  presume  to  make.     Fii'St,  I  will  ven- 
ture to  avow  my  most  solemn  conviction  that      ti,o  temptation  no 

J  vision  or  trance. 

the  events  here  related  belong  to  no  trance 
or   dream-land   to   which,  alas,  even    some   better   forms 
of  both  ancient   and  modern  speculation  have  presumed 
to  refer  them,2  but  are  to  be  accepted  as  real  and  literal 

1  So  perhaps  Origen,  who  remarks:  "  Quadraginta  diebus  tentatur  Jesus,  et 
qua  I'uei'iiit  tentamenta  nesoimus."  —  Comment,  in  Luc.  Horn.  xxix.  Vol.  iii.  p. 
966  (i'ii.  Bened.).  Most  of  the  patristic  commentators  seem  to  consider  that 
the  hours  of  hunger  and  bodily  weakness  were  especially  chosen  by  the  Evil 
<  iii*-  for  his  most  daring  ami  malignant  forms  of  temptation.  See  Chrysostom 
mi  Matt.  iv.  2,  Cyril  Alex,  on  Luke  iv.  3,  and  compare  the  excellent  remarks  of 
[rensus,  Ha  r.  v.  21. 

2  The  opinion  that,  if  not  the  whole,  yet  that  the  concluding  scenes  of  the 
t.  mptation  were  of  the  character  of  a  vision,  was  apparently  entertained  by  Ori- 
gen [de  Princlp.  iv.  16,  Vol.  i.  p.  175,  ed.  Bened.),  Theodore  of  llopsuestia 
(Milliter,  Fragm.  Patrum,  Fasc.  i.  p.  107),  and  the  author  of  a  treatise,  d>  Jejunio 
it  Ten  tat.  Christi,  annexed  to  the  works  of  Cyprian  (p.  86,  Oxon,  1682).  This 
view-  in  a  more  extended  application  has  been  adopted  by  many  modern  writers, 
both  English  (Farmer,  on  Christ't  Temptation,  ed.  8,  Lond.  1776)  and  foreign,  but 
it  need  scarcely  be  said  that  all  such  opinions,  —  whether  the  Temptation  be  sup- 
posed a  vision  especially  called  np,  or  a  mere  significant  dream  (see  Mej  erin  Stud. 


112  THE   EARLY  JUDiEAN  MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

occurrences,  —  yea,  as  real  and  as  literal  as  that  final  over- 
throw of  Satan's  power  on  Calvary,  when  the  Lord  reft 
away  from  him  all  the  thronging  hosts  of  darkness,1  and 
triumphed  over  them  on  His  very  cross  of  suffering. 
Secondly,  I  could    as  soon  doubt  my  own 

The   temptation  ■    .  ,        ,   ,     . ,  ,     ,     ,  - 

an  assault  from  existence  as  doubt  the  completely  outward 
nature  of  these  forms  of  temptation,2  and 
their  immediate  connection  with  the  personal  agency  of  the 
personal  Prince  of  Darkness.3  I  could  as  soon  accept 
the  worst  statements  of  the  most  degraded  form  of  Arian 
creed  as  believe  that  this  temptation  arose  from  any  inter- 
it.  Krit.  for  1831,  p.  319  sq.),  —  clearly  come  into  serious  collision  with  the  simple 
yet  circumstantial  narrative  of  the  first  and  third  Evangelists;  in  which,  not 
only  is  there  not  the  faintest  hint  that  could  render  such  an  opinion  in  any  degree 
plausible,  but,  on  the  contrary,  expressions  almost  studiously  chosen  {ai/rix^Vt 
Matt.  iv.  1 ;  tfyeTO,  Luke  iv.  1.  Comp.  Mark  i.  12,  e/Cj8aAAet ;  irpoo-€\^wv,  Matt. 
iv.  3;  Trapa\afx^ai/fi,  ver.  5;  avayaywv,  Luke  iv.  5;  aTreffrri,  ver.  13)  to  mark 
the  complete  objective  character  of  the  whole.  See,  thus  far,  Fritzsche,  Fritzs- 
chior.  Opusc.  p.  122  sq.,  and  Meyer,  Komment.  uber  Matt.  p.  114  sq.,  though  in 
their  general  estimate  of  the  whole,  the  conclusions  of  both  these  writers  are 
distinctly  to  be  rejected.  For  further  notices  and  references  on  a  subject,  the 
literature  of  which  is  perplexingly  copious,  the  student  may  be  referred,  perhaps, 
especially  to  Andrewes,  Sermons  (cii.)  on  the  Temptation,  Vol.  v.  p.  479  sq.  (A.-C. 
Libr.),  Hacket,  Sermons  (xxi.)  on  the  Temptation,  p.  205  sq.  (Loud.  1671),  Span- 
heim,  Bub.  Evang.  li.— lxv.  Fart  n.  p.  195  sq.,  Deyling,  Obs.  Sacr.  xvn.  Part 
II.  p.  354,  and  Huxtable,  The  Temptation  of  our  Lord  (Lond.  184S),  and  for  prac- 
tical comments  on  the  circumstances  and  moral  intention  of  the  whole,  Leo  31. 
Serm.  xxxix.— l.  Vol.  i.  p.  143  (ed.  Ballerin.),  Jones  (of  Naylaud),  Works,  Vol. 
iii.  p.  157  sq. 

1  For  a  discussion  on  the  meaning  of  a-KenSvo-aixevos  in  the  difficult  text  here 
referred  to  (Col.  ii.  15),  and  for  a  further  elucidation  of  the  view  here  taken,  see 
Commentary  on  Coloss.  p.  161  sq. 

2  One  of  the  popular  modes  of  evading  the  supposed  difficulties  in  this  holy 
narrative  is  to  assume  that  the  whole  series  of  temptations  were  really  internal, 
but  represented  in  the  description  as  external.  See,  for  example.  Ulmann,  die 
Unsundlichkeit  Jem,  Sect.  7,  p.  55  (Trans!.).  Most  of  such  views  arise  either 
from  erroneous  conceptions  in  respect  of  the  mysterious  question  of  our  Lord's 
capability  of  temptation,  or  from  tacit  denials  of  the  existence  or  personal 
agencies  of  malignant  spirits.  On  the  first  of  these  points,  see  especially  Mill, 
Serm.  II.  pp.  26 — 39,  and  on  the  second,  Serm.  m.  p.  54  sq.  Some  valuable 
remarks  on  these  and  other  questions  connected  with  our  Lord's  Temptation 
will  be  found  in  the  curious  and  learned  work  of  Meyer,  Historia  Diaboli,  in. 
6,  p.  271  sq.  (Tubing.  1780). 

3  The  monstrous  opinion  that  the  Tempter  was  human,  and  either  the  high- 
priest  or  one  of  the  Sanhedrin  (comp.  Feilmoser,  Tubing.  Quartalschrift  fur 
1S2S)  is  noticed,  but  not  condemned  in  the  terms  which  so  plain  a  perversion 
deserves,  by  Milman,  Hist,  qf  Christianity,  i.  3,  Vol.  i.  p.  153. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUILEAN    MINISTRY.  113 

rial    stragglings   or  solicitations;1    I  could  as  soon  admit 
the  most  repulsive  tenet  of  a  dreary  Socinianism  as  deem 
that  it  was  enhanced  by  any  self-engendered 
enticements,  or  hold  that  it  was  aught  else 
than   the    assault  of  a    desperate  and   demoniacal  malice 
from  without,2  that  recognized  in  the  nature  of  man  a  pos- 
sibility of  falling,  and  that  thus  far  consistently,  though 
impiously,  dared  even  in  the  person  of  the  Son  of  Man  to 
make  proof  of  its  hitherto  resistless  energies. 
Thirdly,  I  cannot  think  it  an  idle  speculation     addreued  to  the 
that  connects  the  three  forms  of  temptation     Jj^'**"' 
with  those  that  brought  sin  into  the  world,3 
—  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  and  the  lust  of  the  eye,  and  the 
pride  of  life ;  nor  can  I  deem  it  unnatural  to 
see  in  them  three  spiritual  assaults  directed 
against  the  three  portions  of  our  composite  nature.4     To 
the  body  is  presented  the  temptation  of  satisfying  its  wants 

1  Such  conceptions  and  supposition?,  alas,  only  too  often  in  this  humanitarian 
age  secretly  entertained,  if  not  always  outwardly  expressed,  are  justly  censored 
by  Dr.  Mill  (Serm.  n.  p.  38)  as  degrading  and  blasphemous.  In  all  speculations 
on  this  mysterious  subject  the  student  will  do  well  to  bear  in  mind  this  admirable 
Statement  of  Augustine:  "  Non  dicimus  nos  Christum,  felicitate  carnis  a  nostris 
sensibua  Bequestratae,  cupidtiatem  vitiorum  scntire  non  potuisse,  scd  dicimus, 
cum  perfectione  virtutis,  et  non  per  carnis  rnnatpisccntiam  procreata  came, 
enpiditatem  non  habnisse  vitiorum,"  —  Op.  Imperf.  cvn.tr.  Jul.  iv.  48,  Vol.  x.  p. 
1306  (ed.  Migne),  — this  great  writer's  hist  and  unfinished  work.  In  estimating 
the  nature  of  our  Lord's  tentability  let  us  never  forget  the  holiness  of  His 
humanity,  and  the  eternal  truth  of  His  miraculous  conception. 

2  On  the  question  as  to  the  form  in  which  the  Adversary  appeared,  whether 
human  or  angelical  (comp.  Taylor,  /.//<  of  Christ,  i.  9.  7,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n. 
■  .  \  ol.  ii-  p.  217),  all  speculation  is  as  unnecessary  as  it  is  more  or  less  pre- 
sumptuous. All  that  we  must  firmly  adhere  to  is  the  belief  that  the  presence  of 
the  Evil  One  "was  real,  and  that  it  was  external  to  our  Lord."— Huxtable, 
V.  mptation  of  the  /.on/,  p.  78.    Compare  -Mill,  Serm.  in.  p.  64. 

3  This  is  touched  upon  by  Augustine  (Enarr.  in  Psalm,  vm.  14.  Vol.  iv.  p. 
116,  ed.  Migne)  and  others  of  the  earlier  writers,  but  nowhere  more  clearly  and 
convincingly  stated  than  by  Jackson.  Creed,  via.  10,  Vol.  vii.  p.  450  sq.  See 
;■  so  \ in heu.  s,  v  rm.  ii.  Vol.  v.  p.  496 (A.-C.  Libr.),  Mill,  Serm.  III.  p.  60. 

4  Tor  a  discussion  on  the  threefold  nature  of  man.  and  a  distinction  between 
the  terms  soul  and  sjiirif.  see  Tin  Destiny  of  the  Creature,  Serm.  V.  p.  00,  and  the 
works  there  referred  to  (p.  167).  The  opinion  of  Mill  that  the  seat  of  the  second 
temptation  was  "our  higher  mental  nature"  (p.  80),  and  of  the  third,  tin-  ■•  high- 
est sell-eon-eioiisiiess,  bj  which  man  becomes  to  himself  the  centre  of  regard  " 
(ib).  is  scarcely  so  simple  or  so  exact  as  the  reference  to  soul  and  spirit  adopted 
iu'llie  text. 

10* 


114  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lkct.  II I. 

by  a  display  of  power  which  would  have  tacitly  abjured 
its  dependence  on  the  Father,  and  its  perfect  submission  to 
His  heavenly  will.  To  the  soul,  the  longing,  appetitive 
soul1  (for  I  follow  the  order  of  St.  Luke)  was  addressed 
the  temptation  of  Messianic  dominion2  (mere  material 
dominion  would  seem  by  no  means  so  probable)  over  all 
the  kingdoms  of  the  world,  and  of  accomplishing  in  a 
moment  of  time  all  for  which  the  incense  of  the  one  sacri- 
fice on  Calvary  is  still  rising  up  on  the  altar  of  God.  To 
the  spirit5  of  our  Redeemer,  with  even  more  frightful  pre- 
sumption, was  addressed  the  temptation  of  using  that 
power  which  belonged  to  Him  as  God  to  vindicate  His 
own  eternal  nature,  and  to  display  by  one  dazzling  miracle 
the  true  relation  in  which  Jesus  of  Nazareth  stood  to  men, 
and  to  angels,  and  to  God.4 


1  This  we  may  roughly  define  with  Olshauscn  as  "  vis  inferior  [in  homine]  qua; 
agitur,  movetur,  in  iraperio  tenetur"  (Opusc.  p.  154),  and  may  in  many  respects 
regard  as  practically  identical  with  KapSia, — the  soul's  imaginary  seat  and 
abidingplace.  See  Comment,  on  Phil.  iv.  6,  Destiny  of  Creature,  v.  p.  117,  and 
Beck,  Seelenlehre,  in.  20,  p.  63.  On  the  order  of  the  temptations,  compare  Gres- 
well,  Dissert,  xx.  Vol.  ii.  p.  192,  Mill,  Serin,  iv.  p.  82  sq. 

2  See  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  3.  6,  Part  n.  p.  225.  and  compare  Huxtable, 
Temptation  of  the  Lord,  p.  87  sq.  If  with  Dr.  Mill  we  refer  it  to  worldly 
dominion  generally  {Serm.  iv.  p.  105),  we  must,  with  the  same  learned  author, 
suppose  that  Satan  really  did  not  fully  know  the  exact  nature  of  Him  whom  he 
impiously  dared  to  tempt  (p.  63.  Comp.  Cyril  Alex,  on  Luke  iv.  3);  a  view, 
however,  which  does  not  seem  fully  consistent  with  the  opening  address  of  the 
Tempter. 

3  This  third  and  highest  part  in  man  we  may  again  roughly  define  with  Ols- 
hausen  (compare  note  1)  as  "vis  superior,  agens,  imperans  in  homine"  (Optisc. 
p.  154),  and  may  rightly  regard  as  in  many  respects  identical  with  vovs.  See 
Comment,  on  Phil.  iv.  6,  Destiny  of  Creature,  v.  p.  115,  and  Delitzseh,  Bill. 
Psychol,  iv.  p.  145. 

4  The  third  form  of  temptation,  that  of  spiritual  presumption,  has  been  thus 
well  paraphrased  by  Dr.  Mill:  "Give  to  the  assembled  multitudes  the  surest 
proof  that  thou  art  indeed  their  expected  King,  —  the  Desire  of  them  and  of  all 
nations,  —  at  whose  coming  the  Lord  shall  shake  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and 
make  this  house  more  glorious  than  the  mysterious  Shekinah  made  the  first."  — 
Serin,  p.  118.  The  exact  spot  (t2>  Trrepvytov  rod  Upov,  Matt.  iv.  5)  which  was 
the  scene  of  this  temptation  is  not  perfectly  certain.  The  most  probable  opinion 
is  that  it  was  the  topmost  ridge  of  the  (rroa  /3a<riAiK?)  on  the  south  side  of  the 
temple  (observe  that  in  both  evangelists  it  is  rb  irrepvyioi'  rov  lepov,  not 
rod  vaov),  the  height  of  which  is  thus  alluded  to  by  Josephus:  "If  any  one 
looked  down  from  the  top  of  the  battlements,  or  down  both  those  altitudes,  he 
would  be  giddy,  while  his  sight  could  not  reach  to  such  an  immense  depth."*— 


Lect.  III.  THE    EARLY    JUDiEAN    MINISTRY.  115 

When  every  form  of  temptation  was  ended,  the  baffled 
Tempter  departs,  but,  as  St.  Luke  reminds 

11  •     i  l  ^'1C   ministering 

us,  only  for  a  season;  and  straightway  those     anga»,and  o,c  re- 

,  ,  ,  .    .  ,  .     .    ,  <•  /»  tuni  to  Galilee. 

blessed  spirits,  whose  ministry  but  a  lew  mo-         ca.fr.ia. 
ments  before  the  Devil  had  tempted  Him  to 
command,  now  tender  to  their  Lord's  weakened  humanity 
their    loving    and    unbidden  services.1     Sus- 

&  m  V.r.  11. 

tained  by  these  angelical  ministries,  our  Lord 
would  seem  at  once  to  have  returned  backward  to  the 
valley  of  the  Jordan  in  his  homeward  way  to  Galilee,  and 
alter  a, few  days  — for  here  to  assume,  with  a  recent  chro- 
nologer,  a  lapse  of  several  months,'-'  is  in  the  highest  degree 
unnatural  —  to  have  had  that  second  and  noticeable  inter- 
view with  the  Baptist  at  Bethany,  or  Betha- 

1  C'A.  1.  29. 

bara,  which  is  recorded  to  us  by  St.  John. 

It  was  but  the  day  before  that  the  Fore-       T,„ ,t, .,„•„„„,,,  ,„■ 
runner  had  borne  his  testimony  to  the  dep-       'j^,iM 
utation  of  Priests  and  Levites  that  had  come 
to  him  from   Jerusalem;'1  and  now,  absorbed,  as  he  well 


dntiq.  xv.  ii.  5  (Whiston).  This,  however,  could  scarcely  be  so  clear])-  in  the 
sighl  of  "the  assembled  multitudes"  (Mill),— If  indeed  this  be  a  necessary 
adjnnct, — as  at  other  sites  thai  have  been  proposed.  See  Middle  ton,  Greek  Art. 
I>.  185  (id.  Rose),  and  Meyer,  Komment.  ub.  M>ttt.  iv.  5,  p.  110. 

1  The  nature  of  the  services  Of  these  blessed  spirits,  owing  to  the  use  of  the 
.!  term  StrjKovow  (Matt.  iv.  11),  cannot  be  more  exactly  specified.  If  we 
admit  conjectures  we  may  venture  to  believe  that  they  came  to  supply  sustenance 
("  allato  cibo,"  Beng. ;  comp.  1  Kings  xix.),  and  possibly  cUso  to  administer  sup- 
port and  eoniH.it  ("ad  solatium  refero,"  Calv.j  comp.  Luke  xxii.  43).  See 
Backet,  Serin,  xxi.  p. 406(Lond.  1675). 

■j  See  w 'ieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  \>.  258,  and  compare  the  remarks  on  the  chro- 
nology Of  this  period  made  above,  p.  V>7.  note  2. 

•"  This  deputation,  we  are  informed  by  the  Evangelist,  was  sent  by  the  'lovocuoi, 

—  a  general  mime  by  which  St.  John  nearly  always  designates  the  Jews  in  their 

peculiar  aspect  as  a  hostile  community  to  our  Lord,  and  as  standing  in  marked 

contrast  to  the  impressible  oxAos.    The  more  special  and  direct  senders  of  tins 

deputation  of  Priests  and  their  attendant  Levites  (John  i.  19)  were  perhaps  the 

members  of  the  Sanhedrin,  by  whom  these  emissaries  might  have  been  directed 

to  inquire  into  and  test  the  Baptist's  pretensions  as  a  public  teacher  (comp.  Matt. 

xxi.  28),  and  to  gain  some  accurate  information  alio  at  one  who  was  drawing  all 

ilem  and  Judsea  to  bis  baptism  (Matt,  ill-  5),  and  in  whom  somi 

ed  that  they  recognized  the  expected  Messiah  (Luke  ui.  15).    <>n  the  in.— 

•  nerall] ,  see  Lange,  Leben  Jem,  a.  f  1.  Part  n.  p.  451,  Lttcke,  (  omnu  nt. 

UbfirJoh.  Vol.  i.  p.  881j  and  on  the  particular  questions  propounded  to  the  Bap- 


Ver.  40. 


11 G  THE   EARLY  JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

might  have  been,  in  the  thoughts  of  Him  to  whom  he  had 
so  recently  borne  witness,  he  raises  his  eyes, 

Ch.  t.  29.  '  J       ' 

and  lo!  he  sees  coming  to  him  the  very  sub- 
ject of  his  meditations;  he  sees  his  Redeemer,1  and  humbly 
greets  Him  "  as  the  Lamb  of  God  that  tak- 

John  t.  29. 

eth  away  the  sin  of  the  world."     With  the 

same  significant  words2  the  Baptist  parts  from  Him  on 

the  morrow,  —  words  that  sank  so  deep  into 

J  er.  35.  J 

the  hearts  of  two  of  his  disciples,  Andrew, 
and  not  improbably  the  Evangelist  who  gives  the  account, 
that  they  follow  the  Lord,  and  abide  with 
Him,  to  return  back  again  no  more.  On  the 
morrow,  with  Simon  Peter  and  Philip  of  Bethsaida,  and 

tist,  Origen,  in  loc.  Vol.  iv.  p.  108  (ed.  Bened.),  Greg.  Magn.  in  Evang.  I.  7,  Vol. 
i.  p.  1456  (ed.  Bened.). 

1  The  circumstances  that  led  to  this  meeting  are  wholly  unknown  to  us.  That 
it  took  place  after  our  Lord's  baptism  seems  certain;  and  that  the  preceding 
interview  with  the  Priests  and  Levites  also  took  place  after  the  same  event  seems 
to  follow  from  the  words  "  whom  ye  (v/j.e?s)  know  not"  (ver.  26),  — an  expres- 
sion which  may  be  fairly  urged  as  implying  by  contrast  some  knowledge  on  the 
part  of  the  speaker.  Now,  as  we  learn  from  St.  Mark  (ch.  i.  12)  that  the  Tempta- 
tion followed  immediately  after  the  Baptism,  we  may  perhaps  reasonably  believe 
that  our  Lord  was  now  on  His  homeward  way  to  Galilee  after  the  Temptation 
(comp.  August,  de  Consens.  Evang.  u.  17),  and  that  He  either  specially  went  a 
little  out  of  His  way  again  to  see  and  greet  the  Baptist,  or  that  the  direction  of 
His  journey  homeward  led  Him  past  the  scene  of  the  previous  baptism,  where 
John  was  still  preaching  and  baptizing.  If  we  fix  the  site  of  the  Temptation  at 
(Junrantana,  the  former  supposition  will  seem  most  probable,  if  the  mountains 
of  Moab  (see  above,  p.  110,  note  3),  the  latter.  The  deputation  from  the  Sanhe- 
drin  and  the  close  of  the  Temptation  would  thus  appear  to  have  been  closely 
contemporaneous.  See  Lucke  on  John  i.  19,  Vol.  i.  p.  398,  and  compare  Lampe 
in  loc,  and  Luthardt,  Joh.  Evang.  Vol.  i.  p.  329. 

2  Into  the  exact  meaning  of  these  words  we  will  not  here  enter  further  than 
to  remark,  (a)  that  the  reference  seems  clearly  not  to  the  Paschal  Lamb  (Lampe, 
Luthardt,  al.),  a  reference  sufiiciently  appropriate  afterwards  (1  Cor.  v.  7),  though 
not  now,  but  to  Isaiah  liii.  7  (Origen  VI.  35),  a  passage  which,  to  one  so  earnestly 
expecting  the  Messiah  as  the  holy  Baptist,  must  have  long  been  well-known  and 
familiar;  (b)  that  the  meaning  of  ctiptiv  has  nowhere  been  better  expressed  than 
by  <  hrvsostom,  who  in  referring  to  a  former  part  of  the  same  prophecy  (Isaiah 
xxiii.  4)  says:  "He  did  not  use  the  expression,  'He  ransomed'  (e\v<rev),  but 
'He  received  and  bare'  (eAa/3ej/  Kal  e/3a<TTa<rej/) ;  which  seems  to  me  to  have 
been  spoken  by  the  prophet  rather  in  reference  to  sins,  in  accordance  with  the 
declaration  of  John,  '  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world.'"'  Horn,  in  Matt.  xvn.  1,  Vol.  vii.  p.  370  (ed.  Bened.  2).  For  further 
information  on  both  these  points  consult  the  elaborate  notes  of  Lucke,  in  loc.  Vol. 
i.  p.  404  gq. 


LKCT.  in.  THE   EARLY  JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  117 

Nathanael  of  Cana  added  to  the  small  company,1  the  Lord 

directs  His  steps  onward  towards  the  hills 

of  Galilee,  perchance  by  the  very  patli  which 

he  had  traversed  in  solitude  a  few  eventful  weeks  before. 

The  immediate  destination  of  that  small  company  was 
doubtless  the  Lord's  earthly  home  at  Naza- 

*  The  journey  to, 

reth  ; 2  but  there,  as  we  learn  from  the  Evan-     and    miracle  at, 

x  /.  i        i  Cana  in  Galilee. 

gehst,  the  Lord  could  not  have  iound  the 
blessed  Virgin,  as  she  was  now  a  few  miles  off  at  Cana,3 
the  guest  at  a  marriage  festival.     How  natural  then  was  it 
that  the  Lord,  with  his  five  disciples,  one  of 

John  xxi.  2. 

whom  belonged  to  Cana,  should  at  once  pass 
onward  to  that  village,  to  greet  her  from   whom   He   had 
been  separated  several  weeks.     And  how  consistent  is  the 
narrative  that  tells  us  that  on  the  third  day         0.0.1. 
after  leaving  Bethany  the  Lord  and  His  fol- 
lowers had  become  the  invited  and  welcome         '"'"' 
guests  of  those  with  whom  the  Virgin  was  now  abiding. 
With    the    details    of   the   great   miracle 

,   .    1  ...  .  T  1  1  .  Remarks  on  the 

which  on  this  occasion  our  Lord  was  pleased     „„><„./,. 

to  perform,  we  are  all,  I  trust,  too  familiarly 

acquainted  to  need  any  lengthened  narrative.4     We  may, 


1  Wo  can  scarcely  agree  with  Greswell  (Dissert,  mrm.  Vol.  p.  284  Bq.)  in  the 
inference  that  the  two  disciples  did  not  now  permanently  attach  themselves  to 
our  Lord.     The  express  terms  of  the  call  given  the  next  day  to  Philip,  ' 

me"  (ver.  44).  and  the  certain  fact  that  some  disciples  were  with  our  Lord  the 
day  following  (John  ii.  2),  seem  strongly  in  favor  of  the  opinion  that  all  the  live 
disciples  here  mentioned  did  formally  attach  themselves  to  our  Lord,  and  went 
with  Him  into  Galilee.  See  Ifaldonatos  on  John  i.  43  andii.  2.  The  miracle  that 
followed  had  special  reference  to  these  newly-attracted  followers.  See  John  ii. 
11.  and  compare  Luthardt,  Johann.  Evcmg.  Vol.  i.  p.  351. 

2  Unless  we  accept  the  not  very  probable  supposition  alluded  to  p.  107,  note  1. 

3  On  the  position  of  Cana,  which  now  appears  rightly  fixed,  not  at  Kefr  Keuna 
(De  Saulcy,  Voyage,  Vol.  ii.  p.  44S),  but  at  Kami  el-Jelil,  about  three  hours  dis- 
tant from  Nazareth.  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  346  Bq.,  Vol.  iii.  p.  108 
(ed.  2),  and  Thomson,  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  121  sq. 

1  For  details  and  explanatory  remarks  the  student  may  be  especially  referred 
to  the  oommentai  ies  of  Bialdonatus,  LUcke,  and  .Me;,  er,  to  the  exquisite  contem- 
plation of  P.p.  Hall,  Hook  11.  5,  to  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  00  sq.,  and 
to  the  comments  of  Lange,  /.<  b  n  Jesu,  11.  4.  4,  Part  n.  p.  4T.">.  The  Bnpposed 
typical  telations  are  alluded  to  in  a  somewhat  striking  sermon  of  Bp.  Copleston, 


118  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

however,  somewhat  profitably  pause  on  one  portion  of 
it,  the  address  of  the  Virgin  to  our  Lord,  and  the  an- 
swer He  returned,  which  has  been  thought  to  involve 
some  passing  difficulties,  but  which  a  consideration  of  the 
previous  circumstances,  combined  with  a  due  recognition 
of  Jewish  customs,  tends  greatly  to  elucidate.  In  the 
first  place  let  us  not  forget,  —  if  Ave  may  place  any  reliance 
upon  modern  customs  as  illustrative  of  ancient,1  —  that 
the  fact  of  guests  adding  contributions  to  an  entertainment 
which  extended  over  several  days  is  by  no  means  singular 
or  unprecedented.  With  this  let  us  combine  the  remem- 
brance that  the  Lord  and  His  five  disciples  had,  as  it 
would  appear,  come  unexpectedly,2  a  few  hours  only  before 
the  commencement  of  the  marriage  feast.  In  the  next 
place  let  us  reflect  how  more  than  natural  it  would  be  for 
these  disciples  —  two  of  whom,  as  we   are 

Johni.37.  .  \ 

specially  told  by  the  Evangelist,  had  heard 
the  significant  announcement  of  the  Baptist,  "Behold  the 

Remains,  p.  256.  Compare  with  it  Augustine,  in  Joann.  Tractat.  ix.  5,  Vol.  iii. 
p.  146  (ed.  Migne),  where  very  similar  views  will  also  be  found. 

1  The  writer  of  this  note  was  lately  informed  by  a  converted  Jew  on  whom 
reliance  could  be  placed,  that  it  was  not  at  all  uncommon  for  the  guests  at  a 
wedding-feast  to  make  contributions  of  wine  when  there  seemed  likely  to  be  a 
deficiency,  and  that  such  cases  had  fallen  under  his  own  observation.  Be  this 
as  it  may,  it  seems  at  any  rate  clear  that  the  marriage-feasts  usually  lasted  as 
long  as  seven  days  (Judges  xiv.  12,  15;  Tobit  xi.  10),  and  it  is  surely  not  unrea- 
sonable to  suppose  that  in  the  present  case  the  givers  of  the  feast  were  of  humble 
fortunes  (Lightfoot  conjectures  it  to  have  been  at  the  house  of  Mary,  the  wife  of 
Cleophas.  Compare  Greswell,  Dissert,  xvn.  Vol.  ii.  p.  120),  and,  as  Bp.  Taylor 
quaintly  says,  "  had  more  company  than  wine."  —  Life  of  Christ,  n.  10.  5.  For 
further  notices  and  references,  see  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  " Hochzeit,"  Vol.  i.  p. 
499  sq. 

'-  The  only  statement  that  might  seem  indirectly  to  militate  against  this  is  the 
comment  of  St.  John,  e/cA^j&rj  5e  iced  6  'Itjctovs  ku\  oi  na&rj'rcd  avrov  els  yd/ioy, 
ch.  ii.  2.  If,  however,  we  date  the  "  third  day  "  (ver.  1),  as  seems  most  natural, 
from  the  day  last-mentioned  (ch.  i.  44),  and  estimate  the  distance  from  Bethany 
on  (he  Jordan  to  Cana,  our  Lord  could  scarcely  have  arrived  at  the  last-men. 
tioned  place  till  the  very  day  specified.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  n.  3, 
]).  253.  The  4K\-f)&ri  then  must  be  referred  to  the  time  when  our  Lord  and  His 
followers  arrived,  and  its  introduction  accounted  for,  as  Slightly  distinguishing 
the  newly-arrived  and  just-iiivited  guests  from  the  Virgin,  who  had  been  there 
perhaps  for  some  little  time.  Comp.  Meyer  in  toe,  and  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  4. 
4,  Part  ii.  p.  470,  whose  date,  however,  for  the  ttj  ripeptf  irj  rpiTij  does  not  seem 
tenable. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  119 

Lamb  of  God,"  and  another  of  whom  had  recognized  in 
our  Lord  the  very  One  whom  prophets  had 
foretold  —  to  have  already  made  such  com-  "^ 

munications  to  the  Virgin  !   as  might   well 
lead  her  to  expect  some  display  of  our  Lord's  changed 
position  and  relations.     He  who  a  few  weeks  before  had 
left   Galilee   the    unnoted   son    of  Joseph    the    carpenter, 
now  returns,  with  five  followers,  the  more  than  accredited 
teacher,  yea,  as  one  of  those  followers  had  not  hesitated 
to  avow,  as  the  Son  of  God2  and  the  King 
of  Israel.     Wrought  upon  by  these  strange         **»«■* 
tidings,  and  with  all  the  lontr  treasured  re- 

.  ,  luh-ii.  19. 

membrances  of  her  meditative  heart  brought 

up  freshly  before  her,3  how  natural,  then,  becomes  that 


1  Though  we  are  not  positively  constrained  by  the  tenor  of  the  narrative  to 
fix  the  miracle  oil  the  very  day  that  our  Lord  arrived  (conip.  Wordsw.  and 
Liicke  in  he),  it  must  be  admitted  that  on  the  whole  such  an  adjustment 
serins  slightly  the  most  probable.  Compare  ver.  10,  in  which  the  remarks  of  the 
apx'rp'^K\iuos  seem  to  have  reference  to  a  single  festal  meal,  the  beginning  and 
end  of  which  it  contrasts.  Even  in  this  case,  however,  the  disciples  could  easily 
have  had  time  to  communicate  to  the  Virgin  enough  of  what  they  had  heard, 
felt,  and  observed  in  reference  to  their  venerated  Master  to  arouse  hopes  and 
expectations  in  the  mother's  heart.  Compare  Theophyl.  and  Euthym.  in  lor., 
both  of  whom,  however,  slightly  over-estimate  the  Virgin's  knowledge  of  what 
had  recently  happened. 

2  Most  modern,  and  some  ancient  expositors,  explain  away  the  title  here  given 
by  Nathanael  to  our  Lord  as  implying  no  more  than  "the  Messiah,''  or,  to  use 
the  language  of  Theophvlact,  one  who  "on  account  of  His  virtue  was  adopted 
as  the  Son  of  Cod  "  (moimribivra  tw  0€o>).  Perhaps  the  further  title  assigned 
by  Nathanael,  and  still  more  our  Lord's  reply  (ver.  51)  may  seem  partly  to  favor 
this  view.  It  will  be  well,  however,  not  to  forget  that  this  assertion  was  made 
by  Xathanael  after  our  Lord  had  evinced  a  knowledge  above  that  of  man  (ver. 
48),  which  might  well  have  awakened  in  the  breast  of  that  guileless  Israelite  some 
feeling  of  the  true  nature  of  Him  who  was  now  speaking  with  him.  So  rightly, 
Cyril.  Alex,  in  /<"'.,  and  Augustine,  in  Joann.  Tract,  vn.  20,  21. 

3  Though  we  certainly  must  not  adopt  the  rash  and  indeed  anti-scriptural 
view  (conip.  John  ii.  11)  spoken  approvingly  of  by  Maldonatus,  and  even  par- 
tially adopted  by  Liicke  (p.  470),  that  the  Virgin  had  previously  witnessed  mir- 
acles performed  by  our  Lord  in  private,  we  may  yet  with  reason  believe  that  she 
ever  retained  a  partial  consciousness  of  the  real  nature  of  her  Divine  .Son,  and 
that  the  mysterious  past  was  ever  freshly  remembered,  when  the  present  Serve  I 
in  any  wav  to  call  it  up  again:  irdi'Ta  awer-ripa  eV  rrj  Kapdia  aurTjs,  K<xl  (K 
tovtwv  i\oyi£eTO  t2»/  vihv  vwip  avdpwwov  Svvaa&ai.  Theophvlact  in  lor.  (p. 
684,  Paris,  1031),  —  but  with  too  definite  a  reference  to  an  expected  special 
bavnaroupyia.     See  below,  page  120,  note  2. 


120  THE   EARLY  JUD^EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

significant  comment  of  the  Virgin,  "they  have  no  wine," 
—  a  comment  that  may  have  alike  implied  that  the  free 
hand  of  unexpected  guests  might  supply  a  want  in  part 
occasioned  by  them  1  (for  this  the  order  to  the  servants 
may  fully  justify  us  attributing  to  the  Virgin),  and  also 
may  have  dimly  expressed  the  hope  that  the  Holy  Jesus 
would  use  these  circumstances  of  partial  publicity  for  the 
sake  of  revealing  His  true  character  to  the  assembled 
guests.2  Under  these  assumptions  how  full  of  meaning 
does  the  Lord's  answer  now  appear.  How  solemnly  yet 
how  tenderly  He  reminds  the  mother  that  earthly  rela- 
tions  must   now   give  place  to  heavenly,3  and    that   the 

1  The  comments  of  Luthardt  on  this  exquisitely  natural  and  strikingly  char- 
acteristic remark  of  the  Virgin-mother  deserve  here  to  be  quoted.  "  It  is  a 
delicate  trait,"  says  this  thoughtful  writer,  ''that  she  does  no  more  than  call 
her  Son's  attention  to  the  deficiency.  She  fuels  such  confidence  in  Him,  yea, 
and  such  reverence  towards  Him,  that  she  believes  that  she  neither  need  nor 
ought  to  say  anything  further.  Of  His  benevolent  nature  she  has  already  had 
many  an  experience;  and  that  He  is  full  of  wisdom,  and  can  find  ways  and 
means,  where  others  mark  them  not,  she  knows  full  well.  More,  however,  was 
not  necessary,  —  especially  where  there  was  this  in  addition,  that  the  presence  of 
Jesus  and  His  followers  had  helped  to  cause  the  deficiency,  —  than  with  humility 
to  direct  His  attention  to  it."  —  Das.  Johann.  Euang.  Vol.  i.  p.  115.  We  may 
here  pause  for  a  moment  to  advert  to  the  number  of  the  waterpots.  Lightfoot 
(Hor.  Ikbr.  in  loc.)  simply  considers  the  wants  of  the  "  multitudo  jam  prsesens," 
and  probably  rightly;  it  is,  however,  worth  a  passing  consideration  whether  it 
depended  in  any  way  on  the  six  newly  arrived  guests. 

2  This  would  seem  to  be  a  correct  estimate  of  the  exact  state  of  feeling  in  t ho 
mother's  heart.  As  Bp.  Hall  well  says,  "she  had  good  reason  to  know  the 
Divine  nature  and  power  of  her  son"  {Contempt,  n.  5):  she  felt  that  lie  could 
display  a  more  than  mortal  power,  and  she  now  lonffed  that  He  would  give 
proof  of  it.  We  thus  avoid  on  the  one  hand  the  over-statement  of  the  earlier 
commentators,  that  this  was  a  definite  exhortation  to  perform  a  miracle  (e«  to 
&avp.a  Trporpeirei,  Cyril);  and  on  the  other  we  avoid  the  serious  uuder-state- 
ment  of  many  modern  writers  (Luthardt  even  partly  included),  that  it  was  a 
request  referring  merely  to  assistance  to  be  given  in  some  natural  way, —  how, 
the  speaker  knew  not.  See,  for  example,  Meyer  in  too.,  who  states  this  latter 
view  in  a  very  objectionable  form. 

8  It  has  been  remarked  by  Luthardt  {loc.  cif.),  and  before  him  by  T>p.  Hall 
( Contempt.  I.  c),  that  in  His  answer  our  Lord  here  addresses  the  Virgin  as  ywtu 
(vcr.  4).  and  not  /j.tit€[),  —  a  term  which,  though  marking  all  respect,  and  subse- 
quently used  by  our  Lord  in  a  last  display  of  tenderness  and  love  (John  xix.  26), 
still  seems  to  indicate  the  now  changed  relation  between  the  Messiah  and  Mary 
Of  Nazareth.  That  our  Lord's  words  contained  a  tender  reproof  is  certain,  and 
that  it  was  felt  so  is  probable;  but,  as  the  Virgin's  direction  to  the  servants 
clearly  shows,  it  could  not  repress  the  longings  of  the  mother,  or  alter  the  con- 
victions of  the  all  but  conscious  Deipara. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY  JUD.EAN  MINISTRY.  121 

times  and  seasons  in  which  the  Eternal  Son  is  to  display 
His  true  nature  are  not  to  be  hastened,  even  by  the  long- 
ings of  maternal  love.  The  Lord's  manifestation,  however, 
takes  place,  the  miracle  is  performed,  and  its 
immediate  effect  is  to  confirm  the  faith  of 
the  five  disciples,  who  now  appear  before  us  as  the  first 
fruits  of  the  ingathering  of  the  Church. 

Immediately  after  the  performance  of  this  first  miracle 
the   Lord,  with    His   mother,  His   brethren, 

1  Britf  stay  at  Ca- 

and  His  disciples,  go  down  to  Capernaum,1  a  pemaum,andjour- 
place,  which,  as  the  residence  of  one  of  His 
followers,  but  still  more  as  a  convenient  point  for  joining 
the  pilgrim-companies  now  forming  for  the  paschal  journey 
to  Jerusalem,  would  at  this  time  be  more  suitable  for  a 
temporary  sojourn  than  the  secluded  Nazareth.2     After  a 

1  The  exact  site  of  Capernaum  has  been  much  contested.  See  Robinson,  Pal' 
estine,  Vol.  iii.  p.  348  sq.  (ed.  2),  where  the  question  is  discussed  at  considerable 
length,  and  the  site  fixed  at  Khun  Minyeh,  a  place  not  far  from  the  shore  of  the 
lake  and  at  the  northern  extremity  of  the  plain  of  Gennesareth.  Comp.  Vol.  ii. 
p.  403.  On  the  whole,  however,  the  name,  ruins,  position,  and  prevailing  tradi- 
tion seem  justly  to  incline  us  to  fix  the  site  at  Tell  Hum,  a  ruin-bestrewed  and 
slightly  elevated  spot  on  a  small  projecting  curve  of  the  shore,  about  one  hour  in 
distance  nearer  the  head  of  the  lake  than  Khan  Minyeh.  See  esp.  Thomson, 
Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  i.  p.  542  sq.,  Hitter,  Erdlcunde,  Vol.  xv.  p.  339,  Van  de 
Velde,  Memoir  (accompaning  map)  p.  302,  and  Williams  in  Smith's  Diet,  of 
Geogr.  s.  v.  Vol.  i.  p.  504. 

2  This  observation  seems  justified  by  the  fact  that  the  western  shores  of  the 
lake  of  Gennesareth  were  at  that  time  extremely  populous,  and  scenes  of  a 
bustle  and  activity  of  life  that  could  be  found  nowhere  else  in  Palestine,  except  at 
Jerusalem  (see  Stanley,  Palestine,  chap.  x.  p.  370);  and  further  by  the  fact  that 
there  were  at  least  three  routes  of  considerable  importance  that  led  from  the 
neighborhood  of  the  lake  to  the  south.  The  traveller  of  that  day  might  join  the 
great  Ejrypt  and  Damascus  road,  where  it  passes  nearest  to  the  lake  (near  Khan 
ftfinyeh;  Bee  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  405,  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  226), 
and  tearing  it  two  or  three  miles  W.  S.W.  of  Nain  proceed  south  through  Sama- 
ria; or  secondly,  he  might  journey  along  the  lake  to  Scythopolis  (Beisan),  and 
thence  by  the  ancient  Egypt  and  Midian  road  to  Gina;a  (see  Winer,  BWB.  Art 
"  Btrassen,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  539,  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  238),  and  so  onward  by  the 
Jerusalem  and  Galilee  road  to  Shechem  and  the  south  ;  or  thirdly,  he  might  take 
the  then  more  frequented  but  now  little,  known  route  from  the  south  end  of  the 
lake  through  Perea  (comp.  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  233,  Ritter,  Erdkunde 
IPcddstkia),  {  13.  Part  xv.  p.  1001  sq.),  and  across  the  Jordan  to  Jericho,  and  so 
to  Jerusalem.  For  (farther  Information  on  this  somewhat  important  subject,  the 
Student  may  be  referred  to  Belaud,  Patastina,  II.  3,  Vol.  i.  p.  404  (Traject.  1714); 
Winer,  RWB.  [loc.  eU  \\  the  various  itineraries  in  Ritter,  ErdJeunde  [Palttstina), 
Part  xv. ;  and  the  useful  list  of  routes  in  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  pp.  183—258. 

11 


122  THE   EARLY  JTJDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

stay  of  but  a  few  days,  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  now 
bend  their  steps  to  Jerusalem,  to  celebrate 
the    passover,1 — the   first   passover  of   our 

Lord's  public  ministry. 

The  first  act  is  one  of  great  significance,  the  expulsion 
of  the  buyers  and  sellers  from  the  temple,  — 

The  expulsion  of  *  *■ 

ihctraders/romthe     an  act  repeated  two  years   afterwards  with 

TemjAe.  .  .r  J 

similar  circumstances  of  holy  zeal  for  the 
sanctity  of  His  Father's  house.2  How  strange  it  is  that 
the  thoughtful  Origen  should  have  found  any  difficulties 
in  this  authoritative  act  of  the  Messiah,  or  should  have 
deemed  incongruous  and  unsuited  to  the  dignity  of  his 
Master  what  in  the  narrative  of  the  Evangelist  appears  to 
be  so  natural  and  intelligible.3  If  we  closely  consider  the 
words  of  the  original,  we  have  presented  to  us  only  the 
A^ery  natural  picture  of  the  Redeemer  driving  out  from  the 
court  of  the  Gentiles  the  sheep  and  oxen,  that  base  huck- 
stering and  traffic  had  brought  within  the  sacred  enclosure. 
What  is  there  here  unseemly,  what  is  there  startling,  in 
finding  that  the  Lord  of  the  Temple  not  only  drives  forth 


1  It  is  not  mentioned  positively  that  the  disciples  accompanied  our  Lord,  but  it 
is  certain  that  they  were  present  at  Jerusalem  and  witnessed  the  purgation  of  the 
temple.  See  John  ii.  17,  where  the  lii.vt\a(b-no~av  is  not  to  be  referred  to  any 
future  time  (Olsh.),  but  to  the  period  in  question.  See  Meyer  in  loc,  and  comp. 
Origen,  inJoann.  Tom.  x.  16,  Vol.  iv.  p.  186  (ed.  Bened.). 

2  That  this  is  not  to  be  identified  with  the  purgation  of  the  temple  mentioned 
by  the  Synoptical  Evangelists  (Matt.  xxi.  12  sq.,  Mark  xi.  15  sq.  *Luke  xix.  45 
sq.),  is  the  opinion  of  the  patristic  writers  (see  Origen,  in  Joann.  Tom.  x.  15, 
Ohrysost.  in  Matt.  Horn,  lxvii.  init.,  and  August,  de  Consensu  Evang.  n.  67), 
and  is  rightly  maintained  by  the  majority  of  the  best  recent  expositors.  See 
Meyer  in  loc,  and  Ebrard,  Ev.  Gesch.  p.  488. 

3  These  difficulties  are  stated  very  clearly  in  his  Commentary  on  St.  John,  Book 
x.  16,  Vol.  iv.  p.  185  sq.  (ed.  Bened.),  and  yet  disposed  of  by  no  one  better  than 
himself,  when  he  indicates  how  actions  which  in  a  mere  child  of  man,  however 
authorized,  would  have  been  met  with  resentment  and  resistance,  were  in  the 
case  of  our  Lord  viewed  with  a  startled  and  perhaps  reverential  awe,  —  an  awe 
due  to  that  &eioT(pa  rod  'lr)ffov  5vva.fj.is  o'iov  te  octos,  8re  ifiovXero,  koX 
Srvfj.ov  ix&p&v  avairTSfxevov  fff$eo~a.i,  Kal  pvpidScov  frc-ia  ^apiri  TT€piyeveo~&cu, 
Kai  Aoyiffixobs  SopvfiovvTwv  SiacriaSdaai.  lor.  rit.  p.  ISO.  Comp.  Jerome,  in 
Matt.  xxi.  15,  Vol.  vii.  p.  166  (ed.  Vullars.)  See  some  good  comments  on  this 
impressive  act  in  Mil  man,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  i.  3,  Vol.  i.  p.  164  sq.,  and  a 
quaint  but  sound,  practical  sermon  by  Bp.  Lake,  Serm.  Part  IV.  p.  122  sq. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JU1LEAN    MINISTRY.  123 

the  animals,1  but  overthrows  the  tables  of  so-called  sacred 
coin,  tables  of  unholy  and  usurious  gains,  and,  with  a 
voice  and  attitude  of  command,  sternly  addresses  even 
the  sellers  of  the  offerings  of  the  poor,  —  offerings  such  as 
His  own  mother  had  once  presented,  —  and  bids  them  take 
them  hence,  and  make  not  the  house  of  His  Father  a  house 
of  Mammon  and  merchandise?  The  half-astonished,  half- 
assenting  bystanders  ask  for  a  sign  that  might  justify  or 
accredit  such  an  assumption  of  authority,  and 
a  sign  is  not  withheld  ;  a  sign  which,  though 
not  understood  at  the  time,  appears  from  subsequent 
notices  to  have  made  no  slight  impression  on  those  that 
heard  it,2  and  to  have  been  lovingly  remembered  and  veri- 
fied when  the  dissolved  Temple  of  their  Master's  body  was 
reared  up  again  on  the  predicted  day. 

But  not  only  by  this  authoritative  act,  and  these  words 
of  mystery,  but,  as  St.  John  has  specially  recorded,  by  the 
display  of  signs  and  wonders  during  the  celebration  of  the 

l  It  seems  not  improbable  that  Meyer  (in  loc.)  is  right  in  referring  Trduras  (ver. 
16)  to  ra  re  irpojiaTa  koX  tovs  &6as,  and  that  the  translation  should  not  be  "  and 
the  sheep  and  the  oxen  "  (Auth.  Ver.),  but,  '■■both  the  sheep  and  the  oxen,"  as  in 
the  ReviSi  d  Tratul.  of  St.  John.  p.  5.  The  true  force  of  the  re — xai  is  thus  pre- 
served (eomp.  Winer,  Or.  §  53.  4,  p.  389),  and  the  sacred  narrative  freed  from 
one  at  least  of  the  objection.--  which  others  beside  Origen  have  felt  in  the 
Saviour's  use  of  the  (ppayeWtov  against  the  sellers  as  well  as  against  the  animals 
they  Bold.  It  may  be  observed  that  our  Lord  speaks  to  the  "  sellers  of  doves," 
not  perhaps  that  he  regarded  them  with  greater  consideration,  (De  Wette), — 
for  compare  Matt.  xxi.  12,  Mark  xi.  15,  —  but  simply  because  the  animals  could 
1"   ih  i veil  forth,  while  these  latter  offerings  could  only  be  removed. 

'■!  That  these  words  of  our  Lord  referred  to  llis  body,  which  stood  to  the 
Temple  in  the  relation  of  type  to  antitype,  is  the  distinct  declaration  of  the 
inspired  Evangelist  (John  ii.  21),  and  has  justly  been  regarded  by  all  the  older 
expositors  as  the  only  true  and  possible  interpretation  of  the  words.  To  assert, 
then,  that  the  reference  was  simply  to  the  breaking  up  of  the  older  form  of 
religious  worship  and  the  substitution  of  a  purer  form  in  its  place  (Herder, 
Liicke,  De  Wette),  is  plainly  to  contradict  that  Evangelist  who  was  blessed  with 
the  deepest  insight  into  the  mind  of  His  divine  Master,  and  further  to  substitute 
what  is  illogical  and  inexact  for  what  is  clear,  simple,  and  consistent.  See  esp. 
•layer  in  /.«•.  (p.  96,  ed.  2),  who  has  ably  vindicated  the  authentic  interpretation 
of  the  words.    Bee  also  stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  i.  p.  72  eq.j  and  on  the 

eternal   truth   that   our  Lord  did   raise  Himself,  1'earsoli,  Creed,  Alt.  V.  Vol.  i.  p. 

8Q2  sq.(ed.  Bart.).    The  futile  objection  founded  on  the  supposed  enigmatical 

oharacter  of  the  declaration  is  well  disposed  of  by  Chrysostom,  in  loc.  Vol.  viii. 
P  165  l-  (ed.  Bened.  2). 


124  THE   EARLY   JUDJEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

festival,  the  deep  heart  of  the  people  was  stirred.    Many 

believed,  and  among  that  many  was  one  of 

by  mmsS!°ami  ™tiier     the  members  of  the  Sanhedrin1  whose  name 

•**'     ..  „  is  not  nnhonored  in  the  Gospel  history.     He 

Cm.  u.  23.  r  ti 

who  at  this  passover  sought  the  Lord  under 
cover  of  night,  and  to  whom  the  Lord  was  pleased  to  un- 
fold the  mysteiy  of  the  new  birth,2  was  so  blessed  by  the 
regenerating  power  of  the  Spirit  as  to  be  emboldened  at 
a  later  period  to  plead  for  the  Lord  in  the  open  day,  and  to 

do  honor  to    His  crucified   body.     On  that 


mysterious  interview,  which    probably  took 

Ch.  xix.  39.  J  J 


John  vii.  50. 

The  discourse  of    place  towards  the  end  of  the  paschal  week, 
our  Lord  with  me-     j  cannot  here  enlarge:3  but  I  may  venture 

odemus.  °     '  J 

to  make  one  remark  to  those  who  desire  to 
enter  more  deeply  into  the  meaning  of  our  Lord's  words, 


1  Of  this  timid  yet  faithful  man  nothing  certain  is  known  beyond  the  notices 
in  St.  John's  Gospel,  here  and  ch.  vii.  50,  xix.  39.  The  title  he  here  bears, 
&PXW  t&u  'lovBaicof  (in.  1),  seems  to  show  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  San- 
hedrin (comp.  ch.  vii.  26,  CO,  Luke  xxiv.  20;  Joseph.  Antiq.  xi.  1  2);  and  the 
further  comment  of  our  Lord  [o  SiSdffKaAos  rov  'Icpa^A,  ver.  10)  may  favor 
the  supposition  that  he  belonged  to  that  portion  of  the  venerable  body  which 
was  not  of  Levitical  or  priestly  descent,  but  is  spoken  of  in  the  Gospels  under 
the  title  of  ypaixjj.are?s  rov  Kaov.  See  Kuapp,  Scripta  Far.  Argum.  Vol.  i.  p. 
200,  note;  and  comp.  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Matt.  ii.  4,  Vol.  ii.  p.  260  (Roterod. 
1686).  Tradition  says  that  Nicodemus  was  afterwards  baptized  by  St.  Peter  and 
St.  John,  and  expelled  from  his  office  and  from  the  city.  See  Photius,  Biblioth. 
§  171. 

2  Whether  the  word  avcoSev  (ver.  3)  is  to  be  taken  (a)  in  a  temporal  reference, 
and  translated  "anew"  with  the  Vulgate,  Pesh.-Syriac,  Coptic,  and  Ethiopic 
Versions,  and  with  Chrysostom  (who,  however,  gives  the  other  view)  and 
Euthymius,  or  (b)  to  be  taken  in  a  local  reference,  and  translated  "  from  above,"' 
with  the  Gothic  and  Armenian  Versions,  and  with  Origen  and  Cyril,  it  is  very 
hard  to  decide.  The  latter  is  perhaps  most  in  accordance  with  the  usage  (ver. 
31)  and  general  teaching  of  St.  John  (see  Meyer  in  toe.),  the  former  with  the 
apparent  tenor  of  the  dialogue. 

3  For  a  good  general  exposition  of  this  mysterious  discourse  of  our  Lord  with 
the  timid  ruler,  see  generally,  of  the  older  writers,  Chrysostom,  in  Joann.  Horn, 
xxiv.— xxviii.,  Cyril  Alex.,  in  Joann.  Vol.  iv.  p.  145—156,  Augustine,  in  Joann. 
Tractat.  xn.  cap.  3,  Euthymius  and  Theophylact  in  toe;  and  of  the  modern 
expositors,  Knapp.  Script.  Var.  Argum.  Vol.  i.  p.  Iii9— 254,  Meyer,  Kommentar. 
p.  101  sq.,  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  iv.  p.  359  sq.  (Clark),  and  the  excellent 
work  of  Luthardt,  Johan.  Evang.  Vol.  i.  p.  364  sq.  Some  good  remarks  on  the 
character  of  Nicodemus  will  be  found  in  Evans,  Scripture  Biography,  Vol.  ii. 
p.  233  sq. ;  and  an  ingenious  but  not  satisfactory  defence  of  his  timidity  iu 
Niemej  er,  Chardht.  Vol.  i.  p.  113  sq. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  125 

and  it  is  this,  that  if  we  remember,  as  I  said  in  my  first 
lecture,1  that  in  St.  John's  Gospel  our  Lord  especially 
appears  before  us  as  the  reader  of  the  human  heart,  we 
shall  be  prepared  to  find,  as  apparently  we  do  find,  that  He 
often  answers  rather  the  thoughts  than  the  words  of  the 
speaker,  and  alludes  to  the  hidden  feeling  rather  than  the 
expressed  sentiment.2  If  we  bear  this  in  mind,  I  verily 
believe  that,  by  the  help  of  God,  we  shall  be  enabled  to 
gain  some  clew  to  understanding  the  more  difficult  parts 
of  this  most  solemn  and  profound  revelation. 

With  this  interview  the   occurrences   of  this  eventful 
passover  appear  to  have  closed.     Our  Lord 

...  ,  ,      -i  n     ,  Our  Lord  leaves 

perceiving,  by  that  same  knowledge  01  the     Jerusalem  and  re- 
human  heart  to  which  I  have  just  alluded,     paruo/judma. 
that  He  could  no  longer  trust  Himself  even       John  a.  24. 

°  .  Ch.  Hi.  »>. 

with  those  who  had  heard  His  teaching  and 
beheld  His  miracles,  now  leaves  Jerusalem,  most  probably 
for  the  northeastern   portion    of  Judaea,3  in   the  vicinity 
of  the  Jordan,  where  we  seem  to  have  good  grounds  for 
supposing  that  He  was  pleased  to  abide  till  nearly  the  end 

1  See  p.  44,  note  3. 

2  Thus,  for  example,  at  the  very  outset,  our  Lord's  first  words  can  scarcely  be 
considered  an  answer  to  the  words  with  which  Kicodemus  first  addresses  Him, 
but  may  very  suitably  be  conceived  an  answer  to  the  question  of  his  heart,  which 
seems  rather  to  have  related  to  the  mode  of  gaining  an  entrance  into  the  king- 
dom of  God.  Was  the  lowly  but  wonder-working  Teacher  whom  he  addressed 
the  veritable  Way,  the  Truth,  and  the  Light,  or  was  there  some  other  way  still 
compatible  with  the  old  and  familiar  tenets  of  Judaism?  Chrysostom  seems 
rather  to  imply  that  our  Lord  regards  Kicodemus  as  not  yet  to  have  passed  even 
into  the  outer  porch  of  true  knowledge  (cm  ou5e  twv  irpoSvpuv  ttjs  irpocrriKov- 
cttjs  yviLcrtois  «Ve'/3tj),  and  that  He  does  not  so  much  address  Kicodemus  as  state 
generally  a  mystic  truth,  which  he  knew  not  of.  but  which  might  well  arrest 
and  engage  his  thoughts.  Comment.  inJoann.  xxiv.  Vol.  viii.  p.  161  (ed.  Bened. 
2).  The  very  different  views  that  have  been  taken  of  these  opening  words  will 
be  6een  in  the  commentaries  above  referred  to. 

3  The  Evangelist  only  says,  ?i\&ev  u  'l-qaovs  Kal  ol  /uoStjtoI  ainov  eis  ri]i/ 
^lovdaiav  7/jf  (ch.iii.22):  but  from  the  closely-connected  mention  of  the  adminis- 
tration of  baptism,  it  does  not  seem  unreasonable  to  suppose,  with  Chrysostom, 
that  our  Lord  retired  to  the  Jordan  («7rl  rbv  '\opHavi)u  iroWaKis  fy>xeT0),  and 
perhaps  sought  again  the  place  where  He  Himself  had  been  baptized  by  John, 
(-'*•  p.  108,  note  2),  and  to  which  numbers  might  still  be  thronging.     Lightfoot 

1  a  ii  place  more  exactly  to  the  north  of  Jerusalem,  and  closer  to  the  direct 
route  to  Galilee.    See  Harmon.  Quat.  Evomg.  Vol.  i.  p.  446(Uoterod.  1680). 
11* 


126  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

of  the  year.     There  the  sacred  narrative  tells  us  He  bap- 
tized by  the  hands  of  His  disciples,1  and  so 

John  iv.  2.  ft  ii 

wrought  upon  the  hearts  of  the  people  that 

He  eventually  gathered  round  Him  believers  and  disciples, 

which  outnumbered  those  of  John,  many  as 

there  seems  reason  for  supposing  them  now 

The  final    testi-  . 

mony  o/  the  Bap-    to  have  become.     The  Baptist  was  still  free. 
_.  .,.  „         He  was  now  at  iEnon,3  near  Salim,  a  place  of 

John  lit.  23.  '  i       r 

waters  in  the  northern  portion  of  the  valley 
of  the  Jordan,4  and  from  which  he  might  afterwards  have 
passed  by  the  fords  of  Succoth  into  the  territory  of  the 

licentious  Antipas.     At  this  spot  was  deliv- 

John  iii.  27—36.  ..       .      _  . 

ered  his  final  testimony  to  the  Redeemer,  — 
a  testimony,  perhaps,  directed  against  a  jealousy  on  the 
part  of  His  disciples,5  which   might  have  been  recently 


1  The  reason  why  our  Lord  did  not  Himself  baptize  has  formed  a  subject  of 
comment  since  the  days  of  Tertullian.  We  can,  however,  scarcely  adopt  that 
early  writer's  view  that  it  was  owing  to  the  difficulty  of  our  Lord  baptizing  in 
His  own  name  (de  Baptism,  cap.  11),  but  may  plausibly  adopt  the  opinion  hinted 
at  by  the  poetical  paraphrast  Nonnus  (ov  yap  &va£  fSairri^tv  iv  uSaTi,  p.  30,  ed. 
Passow),  and  well  expressed  by  Augustine  ("praebebant  discipuli  ministerium 
corporis,  prabebat  ille  adjutorium  majestatis,"  in  Joann.  Tract,  xv.  4.  3),  —  that 
baptism  was  a  ministerial  act,  and  thus  more  suitably  performed  by  disciples 
than  by  their  Lord.    Compare  Acts  x.  48, 1  Cor.  i.  17. 

2  We  can,  of  course,  form  no  exact  estimate  of  the  actual  numbers  of  disciples 
which  John  might  have  now  gathered  round  him.  As,  however,  the  inspired 
narrative  distinctly  specifies  the  multitudes  that  came  to  his  baptism  (Matt.' iii.  5; 
Mark  i.  5;  Luke  hi.  7),  and  alludes  to  the  different  classes  and  callings  of  which 
they  were  composed  (Luke  iii.  12),  we  may  reasonably  infer  that  the  number  of 
his  actual  disciples  and  followers  could  by  no  means  have  been  inconsiderable. 

3  Some  plausible  but  purely  contextual  arguments  for  fixing  the  site  of  JEnon 
in  the  wilderness  of  Judrea  will  be  found  in  Wieseler,  Cliron.  Synops.  p.  249  sq. 
Such  arguments,  however,  cannot  safely  be  urged  against  the  direct  statements 
of  early  writers.    See  next  note. 

4  There  seems  good  reason  for  identifying  the  Salim,  near  to  which  the 
Evangelist  tells  us  John  was  baptizing,  with  some  ruins  at  the  northern  base  of 
Tell  Ridghah,  near  to  which  is  a  beautiful  spring,  and  a  Wely  (Saint's  tomb), 
called  Sheikh  Salim.  See  Van  de  Velde,  3Iemoir,  p.  345.  Robinson  appears  to 
doubt  this  (Palestine,  Vol.  iii.  p.  333,  ed.  2),  but  without  sufficient  reason.  The 
mere  coincidence  of  name  might  perhaps  be  an  unsafe  argument,  if  the  position 
of  the  place  did  not  accord  with  the  position  of  Salim  as  fixed  by  Jerome  in  his 
Onomasticon  (Art.  "^Enon"),  where  iEnon  and  Salim  are  both  noticed  as  being 
eight  Roman  miles  from  Scythopolis.  See  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  and  Palestine, 
Vol.  ii.  p  345  sq. 

fi  The  words  of  the  sacred  text  (John  iii.  20)  give  us  some  grounds  for  supposing 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDJEAN   MINISTRY.  127 

called  out  by  the  Jew  '  with  whom  they  had  been  contend- 
ing on  the  subject  of  purifying.     That  testi- 
mony was   in   one    respect   mournfully  pro-  ' 
phetic.     He  had  now  begun,  even  as  he  him- 
self said,  to  decrease  ;  his  ministry  was  over ;  the  Bride- 
groom had  come,  and  the  friend  of  the   bridegroom  had 
heard  his  voice,  and  the  joy  of  that  faithful 

J     J  John  in.  20. 

friend  was  now  completed  and  full.     Thus 
it  was  that  apparently  at  the  close  of  this  year,  or,  accord- 
ing to  a  recent  chronologer,  two  or  three  months  later,2 
the  fearless  rebuker  of  sin,  though  it  be  in  kings'  palaces, 
is  seized  on  by  the  irritated  yet  superstitious  Antipas,  and, 


it  possible  that  feelings  of  doubt  or  jealousy  might  have  been  shown  by  some  of 
St.  John's  disciples,  —  feelings  which  perhaps  might  have  remained  even  to  a 
later  period,  and  might  have  been  one  of  the  causes  which  led  to  the  mission  of 
the  two  disciples  recorded  in  Matt.  xi.  2  sq.,  Luke  vii.  18  sq.  There  is  an  expres- 
sion of  something  unlooked  for,  and  perhaps  not  wholly  approved  of,  in  the  fSe 
ovros  $airTi£et  teal  Trdurts  ipyoviai  irpbs  avr6v.  So  Augustine  ("  moti  sunt 
discipuli  Johannis;  coucurrebatur  ad  Christum,  veniebatur  ad  Johanueni''), 
and  still  more  distinctly  Chrysost.  in  loc. 

1  There  seems  no  reasonable  doubt  that  the  true  reading  is  'louSaiov,  and  not 
'IouSaiW  (i!,'c).  The  evidence  for  the  former,  which  includes  eleven  uncial 
MSS.  in  addition  to  the  Alexandrian  and  Vatican,  will  be  found  in  the  new 
edition  of  Tischendorf's  Neio  Test.  Vol.  i.  p.  564.  What  the  exact  subject  of  the 
contention  was  we  are  not  told,  further  than  that  it  was  irepl  Kafrapiff/xov  (vcr. 
25);  it  might  well  have  arisen,  as  Augustine  suggests,  from  the  statement  on  the 
part  of  t lie  Jew  [August,  adopts  the  plural],  —  "  majorem  esse  Christum,  et  ad 
ejus  baptismum  debere  concurri."  —  In  Joann.  Tract,  xm.  3.  8. 

2  The  exact  date  of  the  captivity  of  the  Baptist  is  a  question  of  great  difficulty, 
and  perhaps  can  never  be  settled.  See  Winer,  IIWB.  Art.  "Johannes  der  Tau- 
ter." Vol.  i.  p.  690.  Wieseler,  in  a  very  elaborate  discussion  (Chron.  Synop.t.  p. 
223—251),  has  endeavored  to  show  that  it  took  place  about  the  feast  of  Purim  in 
the  following  year  (March  19,  A.  u.  C.  782),  and  that  he  was  beheaded  a  few  days 
before  the  Passover  (April  17)  of  the  same  year.  The  latter  date  seems  made  out 
[gee  '  Tirotl.  Synops.  p.  2'J2  sq.).  but  the  former  is  open  to  many  objections,  two  of 

■which  may  be  specified:  («)  the  way  in  which  our  Lord  speaks  of  the  Baptist 
(John  v.  33);  and  (l>)  the  brief  space  of  time  that  is  thus  necessarily  assigned  to 
his  captivity,  —  a  time  apparently  as  unduly  short  as  that  assigned  by  Greswell 
is  unnecessarily  long.  See  Dissert,  x.  (Append.)  Vol.  iii.  p.  425.  It  seems  then, 
on  the  whole,  safer  to  adopt  the  first  view  in  the  text,  and  to  suppose  that  St. 
John  was  put  into  prison  shortly  before  our  Lord"s  present  departure  into  (iali- 
lee,  and  that  the  avax  wp7)<m  into  that  country  specified  by  the  Synoptical 
Evangelists  (Matt.  iv.  12;  Mark  i.  14;  Luke  iv.  14)  coincides  with  that  here  speci- 
fied by  St.  .John.  For  a  brief  consideration  of  the  ■'difficulties  this  view  has  been 
supposed  to  Involve,  see  Lect.  iv.  p.  MS,  note  8,  and  compare  the  remarks  of 
Tisohondorf,  8ynops.  Evang.  p.  xxv 


128  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

after  a  short  imprisonment  in  the  dungeons  of  Machaerus,1 
falls  a  victim  to  the  arts   of  the  vengeful 

Luke  Hi.  19,  com-  ° 

pared    with  Mark       IleiXKliaS. 

This  capture  of  the  Baptist,  if  we  adopt 
the  earlier  date,  might,  perhaps,  have- soon  become  known 
to  our  Lord,  and  might  have  suggested  some  thoughts  of 
danger  to  Himself  and  to  His  infant  Church  from  which 
now  He  might  have  deemed  it  meet  to  withdraw.  Per- 
haps with  this  feeling,  but  certainly,  as  St.  John  specially 
tells  us,  with  the  knowledge  that  the  blessed  results  and 
success  of  His  ministry  had  reached  the  ears  of  the  malev- 
olent Pharisees,  our  Lord  suspends  His  first 

John  iv.l.  .     .    ,  .        T      ,  .     . 

ministry  in  Judaja,  a  ministry  that  had  now 
lasted  eight  months,  and  prepares  to  return  by  the  shortest 
route,  through  Samaria,2  to  the  safe  retirement  of  the  hills 
of  Galilee. 

It  was  now  late  in  December,3  four  months,  as  the  narra- 
tive indirectly  reminds  us,  from  the  harvest,4  when  the  Lord 

1  See  Josephus,  Antiq.  xvin.  5.  2;  and  for  a  description  of  the  place,  ib.  Bell. 
Jud.  vii.  6.  2.  From  this  latter  passage,  and  especially  from  the  notice  of  the 
fine  palace  built  there,  we  may  perhaps  suppose  it  to  have  been  the  scene  of  the 
festival  (Matt.  xiv.  6;  Mark  vi.  21)  which  preceded  the  Baptist's  murder.  See, 
however,  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  250  sq.,  who  places  the  scene  at  Livias. 
The  site  of  Machasrus  is  supposed  by  Seetzen  to  be  now  occupied  by  a  ruined 
fortress  on  the  north  end  of  Jebel  Attariis,  which  is  said  still  to  bear  the  name 
of  Mkauer.    See  Ritter,  Erdkunde,  Part  XV.  1,  p.  577. 

2  Our  Lord  was  now  probably  in  the  northeastern,  or,  as  the  e  5  e  i  5e  aurhv 
k.  t.  A.  (John  iv.  4)  may  be  thought  to  suggest,  more  northerly  portions  of 
Juda»a.  Thither  he  might  have  gradually  moved  from  the  more  immediate 
neighborhood  of  the  Jordan,  towards  which  he  seems  first  to  have  gone.  See 
above,  p.  126.  Our  Lord  on  one  occasion  at  least  (Luke  ix.  51  sq.)  adopted  the 
route  through  Samaria,  in  preference  to  the  route  through  Peraea.  At  a  later 
time  the  journey  through  Samaria  was  occasionally  rendered  unsafe  by  the  open 
hostility  of  the  Samaritans  (see  Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.  6.  2),  some  traces  of  which 
we  find  even  in  our  Lord's  time.  Comp.  Luke  ix.  53;  and  see  Lightfoot,  Harm. 
Part  m.  Vol.  i.  p.  460  (Roterod.  1686). 

3  Stanley  (Palestine,  ch.  v.  p.  240,  note,  ed.  2)  fixes  it  in  January  or  February, 
but  in  opposition  to  Robinson,  Harmony,  p.  19  (Tract  Society),  who  adopts  an 
earlier  date.    See  above,  p.  107,  note  3. 

4  See  John  iv.  35,  ovx  VfXtls  hfyere  on  tirt  TZTpa.)j.r,v6s  tariv  k<z\  6  &eptcriJ.bs 
tpXtTai,  —  a  passage  which,  from  the  distinctness  and  precision  of  the  language 
(observe  the  eTi  and  compare  it  with  ^'Stj  which  follows),  has  been  rightly  pressed 
by  some  of  the  best  expositors  as  affording  a  note  of  time.  See  Meyer  in  loc,  and 
especially  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  214  sq.    The  arguments  in  favor  of  its 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  129 

crossed   the  rich  plain  that  skirts  the  southern  and  east- 
ern bases  of  Ebal   and   Gerizim,  and,  weary 

Our  Lord's  jour- 

Wlth  travel,  rested  on  His  way  by  a  well,  which  «<•;/  thrown  swna- 
even  now  the  modern  pilgrim  can  confidently 
identify.1  His  disciples  had  gone  forward  up  the  beautiful 
but  narrow  valley  -  to  the  ancient  neighboring  city,  to  which, 
as  it  would  seem,  Jewish  prejudice  had  long  since  given 
the  name  of  Sychar,8  when  the  grace  of  God  brings  one 
poor  sinful  woman,  either  from  the  city  or  the  fields,  to 
draw  water  at  Jacob's  well.  We  well  remember  the  mem- 
orable converse  that  followed  :  how  the  conviction  of  sin 
began  to  work  within,  and  how  the  amazed  woman  became 
the  Lord's  first  herald  in  Sychem,  —  the  first-fruits  of  the 
great  harvest  that  but  a  few  years  afterwards  was  to  be 
gathered  in  by  Philip  the  Deacon.4 


being  merely  a  proverbial  expression  (corap.  Alford  fa  loc.)  are  extremely  weak, 
ami  are  well  disposed  of  by  Wieseler,  loc.  ait.  A  different  and  very  improbable 
note  of  time  is  deduced  from  the  passage  by  Ureswell,  Dissert,  ix.  (Append.), 
Vol.  iii.  p.  408. 

1  For  a  good  description  of  Jacob's  well,  see  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p- 
286  sq.  Compare  also  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  and  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  399,  and 
Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  206,  where  a  sketch  is  given  of  this 
profoundly  interesting  spot.  For  a  possible  identification  of  this  well  with 
the  ~3*C  yv  of  the  Talmudical  writers,  see  Lightfoot,  Chorogr.  Vol.  ii.  p.  586 
sq.  (Roterod.  1686),  and  compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  256,  note. 

2  For  a  description  of  this  valley,  see  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  and  Palestine,  Vol. 
i.  p.  386  sq.,  and  compare  Stanley,  Palestine,  oh.  v.  p.  232. 

8  The  name  of  Sychar  (not  Sichar;  see  Teschendorf  in  loc.)  does  not  appear 
to  have  arisen  from  a  mere  curruption  of  the  ancient  name  of  Shechem  (<  ilsh., 
al.),  but  from  a  studiedly  contemptuous  change  with  reference  either  to  -J?.'-' 
"  falsehood,"  i.  e.  idol-worship  (compare  lleb.  ii.  18.  and  Reland,  Dissert.  Misc. 
Vol.  i.  p.  241),  or  to  "1-7,  "  drunkard  "  (comp.  Isaiah  xxviii.  1,  and  Lightfoot, 
( '//.;-.Hjr.  Vol.  ii.  p.  586,  Roterod.),  and  in  the  time  of  St.  John  had  become  the 
regular  name  of  the  place.  Compare,  however,  Acts  vii.  16,  where  Stephen, 
perhaps  designedly,  recurs  to  the  ancient  name,  and  Wieseler,  Chron.  si)n<>/>.-<. 
p.  356  ,-<|.  (note),  where  the  name  is  connected,  apparently  less  probably,  with 
""i;-"-."-'!  "to  liire,"  in  reference  to  Gen.  xxxiii.  19.  It  is  now  called  Nabu- 
1ns,  by  a  contraction  from  the  name  of  Neapolis,  afterwards  given  it  by  the 
Romans;  but  it  seems  probable  that  the  ancient  city  was  larger  and  extended 
nearer  to  Jacob's  well.  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  292  (ed.  2).  where 
there  "ill  be  found  a  full  and  excellent  description  of  the  place  and  its  vicinity. 
Compare  also  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  IUink,  Vol.  ii.  p.  200  sq.,  where 
a  sketch  will  be  found  of  the  entrance  into  the  citj  .  Van  de  Velde,  Syria  and 
Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  386  sq.,  and  a  photographic  view  by  Frith,  Egypt  and 

J'll/r.<!illr,    Pail    IV.  3. 

4  See  Acts  \  iii.  5  -<i.,  where  the  thankful  reception  of  the  Gospel  on  the  part 


130  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

The  faith  of  these  Samaritans  and  the  effect  produced 

on   them,  even   when   contrasted   with   that 

The /am  of  the    produced  by  our  Lord  during  His  ministry 

Samaritans.  r  J  o  * 

in    Judaea,   deserves    more    than    a   passing 

notice.     In  Judaea  our  Lord  had  abode  eight  months ;  in 

Sychern  He  spends  but  two  days.     In  Ju- 

John  ii.  23.  /  /  J. 

daea  He  works  many  miracles;    in   bamaria 

He  works  none.1     And  yet  we  read  that  in  Sychem  many 

believed  even  the  vague  tidings  of  the  heart- 

Ch.  iv.  39.  .  '  n     „        ,  , 

stricken  woman,  and  hastened,  iortn  to  wel- 
come Him,  whom  in  the  fulness  of  a  faith  that  overstepped 
all  narrow  national  prejudices  they  believed  and  acknowl- 
edged as  the  true  Messiah,  the  Restorer,  or  perhaps  rather 
Converter,  as  He  was  termed  in  their  own  dialect,2  the 


of  the  Samaritans  is  especially  noticed ;  and  compare  Baumgarten  in  loc.  §  14, 
Vol.  i.  p.  184  sq.  (Clark).  That  the  "  city  of  Samaria,"  to  which  the  Deacon 
went  down  from  Jerusalem,  was  the  city  of  Sychem,  does  not  appear  certain 
(Meyer,  on  Acts  viii.  5),  though  it  may  reasonably  be  considered  highly  probable. 

1  See  some  good  remarks  of  Chrysostom  on  the  faith  of  these  Samaritans, 
when  contrasted  with  that  of  the  Jews.  It  seems,  however,  a  little  rhetorical  to 
say  that  the  latter  "  were  doing  everything  to  expel  Him  from  their  country," 
while  the  former  were  entreating  Him  to  stay.  See  Horn,  in  Joann.  xxxv.  Vol. 
viii.  p.  232.  Throughout  the  Gospel-history  the  multitudes  in  Judasa  or  else- 
where appear  almost  always  to  have  gladly  received  our  Lord,  except  when 
instigated  to  a  contrary  course  by  His  true  and  bitter  enemies,  the  ruling  and 
hierarchical  party  (the  'lovScuoi  of  St.  John;  see  Meyer,  on  John  xi.  19)  and 
their  various  satellites.     Comp.  Matt.  xvii.  20,  Mark  xv.  11. 

2  Much  has  been  written  about  the  expectation  of  a  Messiah  on  the  part  of  the 
Samaritans.  It.  is  not  improbable  that,  as  their  own  letters  in  modern  times 
assert  (see  Hengstenberg,  Christol.  Vol.  i.  p.  66,  Clark),  they  derived  it  from  such 
passages  in  the  Pentateuch  as  Gen.  xlix.  10,  j\"umb.  xxiv.  17,  Deut.  xviii.  15; 
and  that,  though  really  foreigners  by  descent  (comp.  Eobinson,  Palestine,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  289),  they  still  maintained  this  belief  in  common  with  their  hated  neigh- 
bors, the  Jews.  At  any  rate  it  seems  certain  that  an  expectation  of  a  Restorer 
or  Converter,  under  the  title  of  -".'?"  or  -~^~  .  was  entertained  among  them 
at  an  earlier  period  of  their  history  (see  Gesenius,  Samar.  Theol.  p.  41  sq..  and 
the  curious  doctrinal  hymns  published  by  the  same  learned  editor  under  the 
title  Carolina  Samaritana,  p.  75  sq.);  and  wc  learn  from  Eobinson  that  even  to 
this  day.  under  the  name  of  el-Muhdy  (the  Guide),  the  Messiah  is  still  looked 
for  by  this  singular  people.  See  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  278,  and  p.  297  sq.,  where 
an  account  is  given  of  the  celebrated  correspondence  maintained  at  intervals 
between  the  Samaritans  and  Joseph  Scaliger,  Marshall,  and  other  scholars  of 
the  West.  Compare  also  Winer,  Bfl'fi.,  Art.  "  Samaritaner."  Vol.  ii.  p.  273. 
The  exact  meaning  of -~Pn  is  discussed  by  Gesenius  in  the  Berlin  Jahrb.  fur 

Wissensch.  Krit.  for  1S30,  p.  651  sq. 


LECT.  III.  THE    EARLY   JUDJ5AN   MINISTRY.  lol 

Saviour,  as  they  indirectly  avow,  not  of  Samaria  only,  but 
of  all  the  scattered  families  of  the  children 

John  iv.  42. 

of  men. 

But  faith  astonishing  even  as  that  of  Samaria  might  not 
detain  Him  who  came  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the 

T  .  .    _  -  Tlio  further  jour- 

house  of  Israel.     Alter  a  stay  or  two  memo-     „<.,,  ofour  Lu,d  to 
rable  days,  which  the  people  of  Sychem  would     °°w£r  ^ 
gladly  have  had  prolonged,  the  Lord  returns 
to  a  country  that  now  vouchsafed  to  receive  its  prophet ' 
only  because  His  miracles  at  Jerusalem  had  been  such  as 
could  not   be    denied.     Signs   and  wonders 

0  Ver.  45. 

were  all  that  dull-hearted  Galilee  could  ap- 
preciate.    Signs  and   wonders  they  must  see,  or,  as  our 
Lord  mournfully  says,  "they  would  not  be- 
lieve." "We  may  observe,  then,  how  consistent 
is  the  narrative  which  represents  our  Lord  as  having  chosen 
the   scene  of  His  first  miracle  as  His  temporary  resting- 
place.2    He  returns  to  Cana  in  Galilee,  where, 
as  St.  John  significantly  adds,  "He  made  the 

o  rf  >  I  er.  54. 

Water  wine."    There  He  yet  again  performs  a 

second  miracle  in  bringing  back  to  life  the  dying  son  of  the 


1  The  exact  meaning  of  our  Lord's  comment  record,  John  iv.  44,  avrbs  yap 
'Irjcrous  k.  t.  \.,  is  not  perfectly  clear,  owing  to  the  apparent  difficulty  caused 
by  the  argumentative  yap,  and  the  doubtful  application  of  irarpitii.  That  this 
latter  word  docs  not  refer  to  Judaea  (Origen,  and  recently  Wieseler,  Citron- 
Synops.  p.  4.r>),  but  to  Galilee,  seems  almost  certain  from  the  mention  of  Ta\t- 
Aaia  hoth  in  the  preceding  and  succeeding  verses.  The  force  of  the  yap  is,  how- 
•  •-  easj  i"  decide  upon,  but  is  perhaps  to  be  sought  for  in  the  fact  that  our 
Lord  Btayod  bo  short  a  time  with  the  Samaritans,  and  avoided  rather  than  courted 
popularity,  it  is  true  that  be  found  it  in  Galilee  (ver.  46),  but  that  was  because 
He  brought  it,  as  it  were,  from  another  country.  The  Galileans  did  not  honor 
the  Lord  as  their  own  prophet,  but  as  One  whom  they  had  seen  work  wonders 
at  Jerusalem.  The  explanatory  force  adopted  by  Lucke  and  others  does  not 
harmonize  with  the  simplicity  of  the  context. 

-  See  John  iv.  46,  1i\$ev  oZv  \b  'I^o-oCs]  ird\tv  els  Tr\v  Kara,  —  where  the  out/ 

to  imply  that  the  visit  of  our  Lord  was  in  consequence  of  this  disposition 

on  the  part  of  the  Galileans.    He  sees  the  effect  which  miracles  produced  upon 

the  people,  and  is  pleased  so  tar  to  condescend  to  their  infirmities  as  to  sojourn 

for  fl  time  at  t lie  scene  of  a  miracle  that  must  have  made  a  great  impression  on 

I  who  witne I  it,  and  the  memory  of  which   His  presence  among  them 

might  savingly  revive  and  reanimate.  See  Chry60stom  in  loc.  Horn.  xxv.  Vol. 
viil.  p.  325. 


132  THE  EARLY  JULIAN  MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

Capernaite  nobleman,1  —  a  miracle  which  wrought  its 
blessed  effects  on  the  father  and  his  whole 
household,  and  may  thus  perchance  have  had 

some  influence  in  leading  our  Lord,  three  months  after- 
wards, when  rejected  by  the  wretched  mad- 

Luke  iv.  29.  ^  "' 

men  of  JSlazareth,  to  make  Capernaum  His 

earthly  home.2 

Our  present  portion  of  the  Evangelical  history  contains 

but  one  more  event,  —  the  journey  of  our 

mm  to  "Jerusalem     Lord  to  Jerusalem,  and  his  miraculous  cure 
a^the /east  of pu-     of  the  fog^  man  at  the  pool  0f  Bethesda. 

johnv  is  Here,  I  need  scarcely  remind  you,  we  at  once 

find  ourselves  encountered  by  a  question,  on 
the  answer  to  which  our  whole  system  of  Gospel-harmony 
mainly  depends,  and  on  which  we  find,  both  in  ancient3 
and  modern  times,  the  most  marked  diversity  of  opinions. 
The  question  is,  what  festival  does  St.  John  refer  to  at  the 
beginning  of  the  fifth  chapter  of  his  Gospel,  when  he  tells 


1  From  the  instances  from  Josephus  of  the  use  of  the  term  f3affi\it<6s,  that 
have  been  collected  by  Krebs  (Obs.  in  Nov.  Test.  p.  144),  we  may  perhaps  reason- 
ably conclude  that  the  person  here  specified  was  not  a  relative  (C'hrys.  I.),  but  in 
the  service  of  Herod  Antipas  ("  in  famulitio  et  ministerio  regis."  Krebs,  I.  c), — 
in  what  capacity,  however,  cannot  be  determined.  The  opinion  that  this  miracle 
was  identical  with  that  of  the  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant  (Matt.  viii.  5 
sq.,  Luke  vii.  1  sq.)  is  mentioned  both  by  Origen  (in  Joann.  Tom.  xm.  60)  and 
Chrysostom  [in  Joann.  Horn.  xxxv.  2),  but  very  properly  rejected  by  them. 
Kothing  really  is  identical  in  the  two  miracles,  except  the  locality  of  the  sufferer, 
and  the  fact  that  our  Saviour  did  not  see  him.  See  especially  Theophylact  and 
Euthymius  in  loc. 

2  For  some  good  comments  on  the  details  of  this  miracle,  —  one  of  the  charac- 
teristics of  which  is  the  performance  of  the  cure  by  our  Lord  not  only  without 
His  seeing  (as  in  the  case  of  the  centurion's  servant),  but  when  at  a  distance  of 
some  miles  from  the  sufferer,  —  see  the  commentaries  of  Origen,  Chrysostom, 
Cyril  Alex.,  Theophylact,  and  Euthymius;  and  for  a  general  view  of  the  whole, 
Hall,  Contempt,  in.  2,  and  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  117  sq.  Compare  also  Lange, 
Leben  Jesu,  n.  4.  10,  Part  n.  p.  552  sq. 

3  The  differences  of  opinion  as  to  the  festival  mentioned  in  John  v.  1,  are  not 
confined  to  modern  writers.  Irensus  says  that  it  was  at  the  Passover  (Hter.  ir. 
39),  but  as  we  cannot  ascertain  what  reading  (eoprTj  or  7]  kopri],  see  next  note) 
was  adopted  by  this  ancient  writer,  his  opinion  must  be  received  with  some 
reserve.  Chrysostom,  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  and  after  them  Theophylact  and 
Euthymius,  with  more  plausibility,  suppose  it  to  have  been  the  feast  of  Pente- 
cost.   See,  however,  p.  133,  note  2. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY  JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  133 

us  that  "there  was  a  feast  of  the  Jews,  and  Jesus  went  up 
to  Jerusalem"?  The  various  answers  I  will 
not  now  pause  to  discuss,  but  will  say  briefly, 
that,  after  a  prolonged  consideration  of  this  difficult  sub- 
ject, I  venture  to  think  that  as  the  language  of  St.  John, 
according  to  the  correct  text,1  and  when  duly  considered, 
does  seem  distinctly  unfavorable  to  this  festival  being  con- 
sidered as  either  the  Passover  or  one  of  the  three  greater 
festivals,2  we  may,  not  without  many  plausible  arguments, 
adopt  the  view  of  the  best  recent  harmonists  and  commen- 
tators, and  regard  it  as  the  Feast  of  Purim,3  —  the  com- 

1  The  true  reading  appears  certainly  to  be  eoprri  (7?ec),  without  the  article.  It 
has,  in  addition  to  secondary  authorities,  the  support  of  three  out  of  the  four 
leading  uncial  MSS.  (the  Alex.  Vatic,  and  that  of  Beza),  is  specially  commented 
on  in  the  Chronicon  Paschale  (p.  405  sq.,  ed.  Diudorf.),  and  is  adopted  by  Lach- 
mann,  Tischeudorf,  and  the  best  recent  editors. 

2  The  principal  arguments  are  as  follow,  and  seem  of  some  weight:  (n)  the 
omission  of  the  article,  which,  though  sometimes  observed  when  a  verb  sub- 
Btant.  precedes  pliddleton,  Greek  Art.;  comp.  Neander,  Life  of  Christ,  p.  234, 
note,  Bohn),  or  when  a  strictly  defining  or  possessive  genitive  follows  (see  exx. 
in  Winer,  Qramm.  §  19.  2.  b),  cannot  possibly  be  urged  in  the  case  of  a  merely 
inverted  sentence  like  the  present,  and  where  the  gen.  has  no  such  special  and 
defining  force.  See  Winer,  Qramm.  I.  e.  p.  232,  note.  [The  answer  to  this  in 
Robinson,  Harmony,  p.  199  (Tract.  Soc),  has  no  force,  as  the  cases  adduced  are 
not  out  of  St.  John,  wholly  different,  and  easily  to  be  accounted  for.]  To  this 
we  may  add  (b)  the  absence  of  the  name  of  the  festival,  whereas  St.  John  seems 
always  to  specify  it.  Compare  ch.  ii.  13,  vii.  2,  and  even  (in  the  case  of  the 
fyKaifta)  x.  22.  Again  (<•)  it  seems  now  generally  agreed  upon  that  it  was  not 
tlir  Pentecost;  that  if  it  be  a  Passover,  our  Lord  would  then  have  been  as  long  a 
time  as  eighteen  months  absent  from  Jerusalem  (see  Wicselcr,  Chrnn.  Synops.  p. 
217);  and  that  if  it  be  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles,  we  then,  according  to  Ebrard 
(Krit.dt  r  Ev.GeacA.  §  37,  p.  157),  7nHsr  adopt  the  highly  improbable  view  that  it  was 
lint  the  (TKTjvoirriyia.  that  followed  the  Passover  mentioned  cb.  ii.  13,  but  that 
followed  a  second  Passover,  which  St.  John,  usually  so  accurate  on  this  point 
see  ch.  vi.  4),  bas  not  specified.  Lastly,  (d)  if  the  note  of  time  alluded  to,  p.  128, 
note  4,  be  accepted,  the  difficulties  alluded  to  in  (c)  will  be  greatly  complicated 
and  enhanced. 

0  The  arguments  in  favor  of  this  particular  festival,  though  sufficiently  strong 
to  have  gained  the  assent  of  a  decided  majority  of  the  best  recent  expositors, 
are  still  of  a  dependent  and  negative  character.  They  are  as  follows :  (a)  if  the 
note  of  time  derived  from  .John  iv.  35  be  correct,  then  the  festival  here  men- 
tioned clearly  falls  between  the  end  of  one  year  and  the  Passover  of  the  one 
following  (eh.  vi.  4),  and  Consequently  can  be  no  other  than  the  Feast  of  Purim, 
Which  was  celebrated  on  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth  of  the  month  Adar  (Fstli. 
ix.  21);  ('/)  if,  as  seems  shown  in  the  above  note,  strong  critical  as  well  as  exeget- 
Ical  objections  can  be  urged  against  any  and  all  of  the  other  festivals  thai  have 
been  proposed,  then  a  remaining  festival  which  is  only  open  to  objections  of  a 

12 


134  THE   EARLY   JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

memorative  feast  of  Esther's  pleading  and  Haman's  over- 
throw. This  festival,  it  would  appear  by  backward 
computation,  must  have  taken  place  in  this  present  year 
of  our  Lord's  life  (a.  tj.  c.  782),  on  the  nineteenth  of 
March,1  and,  as  we  may  reasonably  infer  from  the  narrative, 
a  Sabbath-day,  —  a  day  on  which,  according  to  the  ancient, 
though  not  according  to  the  modern  calendar  of  the  Jews, 
this  festival  could  apparently  have  been  celebrated,2  and, 
singularly  enough,  the  only  instance  in  which  a  Sabbath 
could  fall  upon  any  one  of  the  festivals  of  the  year  in 
question.3 

weaker  and  more  general  character  (see  below,  note  2)  deserves  serious  con- 
sideration ;  (c)  if  this  date  be  fixed  upon,  the  chronology  of  the  period  between 
it  and  the  following  Passover  not  only  admits  of  an  easy  adjustment,  but  also,  as 
will  be  seen  in  the  course  of  the  narrative,  involves  some  striking  coincidences 
and  harmonies  which  reflect  great  additional  plausibility  upon  the  supposition. 
For  additional  notices  and  arguments,  see  Anger,  de  Tempt,  in  Act.  Apost.  i.  p. 
24  sq.,  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  pp.  205—222,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Book  n.  Part 
I.  p.  9;  and  for  perhaps  the  strongest  statement  of  the  counter-arguments, 
Hengstenberg,  Christology,  Vol.  iii.  p.  244  sq.  (Clark). 

1  For  the  principles  on  which  this  computation  rests,  see  Wieseler,  Cliron. 
Synops.  p.  206  sq.,  compared  with  p.  219.  Compare  also  the  useful  table  in 
Tischendorf,  Synops.  Evang.  p.  li.  ;  and  for  general  tables  for  facilitating  such 
calculations,  see  Browne,  Ordo  Seed.  §  452 — 455,  p.  499  sq. 

2  This  seems  to  be  made  out  by  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  219  sq.,  but  it  is  so 
strongly  questioned  by  Hengstenberg  (Christology,  Vol.  iii.  p.  248),  who  refers 
for  proofs  to  Keland,  Antiq.  Sacr.  IV.  9,  and  the  special  treatise  of  Shickard, 
on  this  festival,  reprinted  in  the  Critici  Sacri,  Vol.  ii.  p.  1183  (ed.  Amstelod. 
1698 — 1732),  —  that  a  few  comments  must  be  made  on  the  subject.  Much  seems 
to  turn  on  the  question  whether  the  fourteenth  of  Adar,  or,  as  Hengstenberg 
urges,  the  day  on  which  the  roll  of  Esther  was  read,  —  a  day,  as  will  be  seen 
from  the  Mishna,  made  variable  for  convenience,  —  was  the  true  day  of  the  fes- 
tival. With  the  opening  sections  of  the  Tract  l;Megillah"  before  us,  we  shall 
probably  (with  Wieseler)  decide  for  the  former,  especially  when  we  compare 
with  the  preceding  sections  the  close  of  sect.  3,  where  it  is  said,  in  answer  to  the 
general  question,  "when  the  Megillah  may  be  read,  before  its  proper  time,"  that 
an  exception  is  to  be  made  for  places  where  it  is  customary  for  [the  country 
people]  to  assemble  on  Mondays  and  Thursdays,  but  that  "  where  that  does  not 
take  place  it  may  only  be  read  on  its  proper  day"  (i<Vs  nns  V"Pp  Vs 
nJKTS).  Mishna,  p.  182  (De  Sola  and  Raphael's  Transl.).  The  question  is  here 
noticed  as  of  some  interest,  but  it  may  be  observed  that  though  it  is  probable 
from  the  sacred  narrative  that  the  Sabbath  on  which  the  miracle  was  performed 
coincided  with  the  festival,  it  is  not  expressly  said  so;  and  that  even  if  the  Feast 
of  Purim  could  not  fall  on  a  Sabbath,  the  main  question  would  remain  wholly 
unaffected  by  it.    See  Meyer,  on  John  v.  1,  p.  143. 

3  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  219,  and  compare  the  table  in  Tischendorf, 
Synops.  Ev.  p.  li.    It  may  be  observed  that  the  year  now  in  question  was  a  leap- 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDJ3AN   MINISTRY.  135 

It  has,  I  know,  been  urged  tliat  our  Lord  would  never 
have  gone  up  to  a  festival  of  mere  earthly 
rejoicing  and  revelry.1  In  answer  to  this,  tl^i;^ionto 
without  pausing  to  compare  this  merely  neg- 
ative statement  with  the  j)ositive  arguments  which  have 
been  advanced  on  the  contrary  side,  let  us  simply  reply, 
that  at  this  festival,  in  which  the  hard  lot  of  the  poor  and 
needy  received  a  passing  alleviation,  the  divine  presence 
of  Him  who  came  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the  poor  might 
not  seem  either  strange  or  inappropriate.3  In  addition  to 
this  let  us  not  forget  that,  in  the  year  now  under  consider- 
ation, the  Passover  would  take  place  only  a  month  after- 
wards, and  that  our  Lord  might  well  have  thought  it  meet 
to  fix  His  abode  at  Jerusalem  and  to  commence  His 
preaching  before  the  hurried  influx  of  the  multitudes  that 
came  up  to  the  solemnities  of  the  great  yearly  festival.3 

But  let  us  now  return  to  our  narrative,  and  with  sadness 
observe  how  the  malice  and  wickedness  of  man  was  per- 

year,  and  had  a  second  month  of  Adar;  hence  the  difference  between  this  cal- 
endar and  that  in  Browne,  Ordo  Siect.  §  594,  p.  647,  where  this  fact  is  not  observed. 
For  exact  information  on  the  difficult  subject  of  the  Jewish  calendar,  see  Ideler, 
Handliuch.  der  Chronol.  Vol.  i.  p.  477  sq.,  the  special  work  of  lien-David,  Gesch. 
Set  Jud.  Kalend.  (Berl.  1817).  Compare  also  the  Excursus  of  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synops.  p.  437  sq.,  and  Browne,  Ordo  Seed.  §  403  sq. 

1  This  objection  is  urged,  though  not  with  much  cogency,  by  Trench,  Miracles, 
p.  245.  For  a  full  account  of  the  ceremonies  at  this  festival,  see  the  work  of 
Shickard,  de  Festo  J'urim  (Tubing.  1634),  above  alluded  to,  p.  134,  note  2),  and 
compare  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Purim,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  589.  The  objection  that  has 
been  founded  on  St.  John's  omission  of  the  special  name  of  tins  festival,  con- 
trasted with  his  usual  habit  in  similar  cases  (ch.  vii.  2,  x.  22),  is  fairly  met  by 
Anger,  who  remarks  that  while  the  names  of  other  festivals  (e.  g.  OKrivoiriiyia 
and  iyKaivta)  partially  explained  themselves,  that  of  the  Feast  of  Purim,  under 
its  Grecized  title  (twc  (ppovpal  or  (povpai,  or  Tljs  MapSoxctKrjs  rmepas),  was 
probably  felt  by  the  Evangelist  as  likely  to  prove  unintelligible  to  the  general 
readers  for  whom  the  Gospel  was  designed.  —  De  Tempt,  in  Act.  Apost.  p.  27  sq. 

2  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  222;  vigorously,  though  not  very  convinc- 
ingly, opposed  by  Hengstenberg,  who  seems  to  take  a  somewhat  extreme  view 
of  the  revelry  and  license  which  prevailed  at  the  festival.  See  Christotogy,  Vol. 
iii.  ]).  247. 

8  A  partial  illustration  of  this  is  supplied  by  John  xi.  55,  where  it  is  expressly 
Kiiil  that  ••  many  went  out  of  the  country  up  to  Jerusalem  before  the  Pcusovi  r, 
to  purify  themselves."  The  VW  ayvlaciicnv  of  course  does  not  apply  in  the  pres- 
ent ease;  but  the  general  fact  that  there  was  such  a  habit  of  going  up  before  the 
festival  is  not  without  significance. 


136  THE   EARLY  JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

mitted   to   counteract  those   counsels   of   mercy,  and   to 
shorten  that  mission  of  love. 

On  this  Sabbath-day,  by  the  waters  of  that  healing  pool,1 
which  ancient  tradition  as  well  as  recent  in- 

The  miracle  at 

the  pool  of  Be-  vestigation  seems  to  have  correctly  identified 
with  the  large  but  now  ruined  reservoir  in 
the  vicinity  of  St.  Stephen's  gate,2  the  Lord  performs  a 
miracle  on  one  poor  sufferer,  who  had  long  lingered  in 
that  House  of  Mercy,3  unpitied  and  friendless.  That 
miracle  was   accompanied  with   a  sign  of  great   signifi- 

1  It  may  be  considered  somewhat  doubtful  whether  ver.  4  is  really  an  integral 
portion  of  the  sacred  text,  or  a  later  addition.  It  is  omitted  by  Tischendorf 
with  the  Vatican  MS.,  the  first  hand  of  the  Codex  Ephremi,  the  Codex  Bezaj, 
and  a  few  ancient  versions,  —  the  valuable  Curetonian  Syriac  (but  see  Roberts, 
On  Lang,  of  St.  Matt.  Gospel,  p.  122)  being  of  the  number.  This  is  undoubtedly 
authority  of  some  weight;  but  as  prejudice  or  reluctance  to  accept  the  fact  speci- 
fied might  have  something  to  do  with  the  removal  of  the  verse,  we  shall  perhaps 
be  justified  in  following  the  judgment  of  Lachmann,  and,  with  one  first  class  and 
nearly  all  the  second  class  uncial  MSS.,  in  retaining  the  verse.  It  must  not  be 
disguised,  however,  that  these  authorities  differ  greatly  with  one  another  in  the 
separate  words,  —  a  further  argument  of  some  importance.  Compare  Meyer, 
Komment.  p.  141  sq.  (ed.  2).  The  attempts,  in  which,  strangely  enough,  a  note  of 
Hammond  is  to  be  included,  to  explain  away  the  miraculous  portion  of  the  state- 
ment, are  very  unsatisfactory.  If  the  verse  is  a  part  of  the  sacred  text,  then 
undoubtedly  the  ultimate  agency,  however  outwardly  exhibited,  whether  by 
gaseous  exhalations  or  intermittent  currents,  was  angelical.  See  Wordsworth 
in  loc.  and  comp.  Lange,  Leben  Jem,  ii.  2.  2,  Part  I.  p.  50,  and  some  curious  com- 
ments and  quotations  in  Sepp,  Leben  Christi,  IV.  5,  Vol.  ii.  p.  315  sq. 

2  This,  it  must  be  conceded,  is  a  debated  point,  as  there  are  arguments  of  some 
weight  in  favor  of  tins  reservoir  being  regarded  as  a  portion  of  the  ancient  fosse 
which  protected  the  temple  and  the  fort  of  Antonia.  See  Robinson,  Palestine, 
Vol.  i.  p.  293  sq.  (ed.  2).  The  traditional  site,  however,  and  its  identification  with 
the  pool  of  Bethesda  mentioned  in  the  ancient  Jerusalem  Itinerary  (p.  589), 
seems  fairly  maintained  by  Williams,  Holy  City,  n.  5,  Vol.  ii.  p.  483,  though 
doubted  by  Winer,  JR  WB.  Vol.  i.  p.  170.  Under  any  circumstances  the  suggestion 
of  Robinson  (apparently  favored  by  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  247),  that  Bethesda  is 
perhaps  to  be  identified  with  the  Fountain  of  the  Virgin,  is  pronounced  by  an 
unbiased  traveller,  who  has  seen  that  deeply  excavated  fountain  (see  vignette  in 
Williams,  Vol.  ii  p.  xi.),  as  plainly  incompatible  with  what  we  must  infer  from 
the  details  of  the  sacred  narrative  as  to  the  nature  of  the  locality  where  the 
miracle  was  performed.  For  a  good  view  of  the  traditional  site,  see  Robertson 
and  Beato,  Views  of  Jerusalem,  No.  12. 

3  This  appears  to  be  the  correct  meaning:  the  true  etymology  not  being  r**2 
K"r^,  "the  house  of  effusion  or  washing"  (Bochart,  Reland,  al.,  followed  by 
Williams,  Holy  City,  Vol.  ii.  p.  487),  but  K"T&rj  in*2,  —  an  etymology  strongly 
confirmed  by  the  I'eshito-Syriac,  which  here  resolves  the  Grecized  form  back 
again  into  its  original  elemeuts  (beth  chesdo).  See  Wolf,  Curae  Philolog.  (in  loc.) 
Vol.  ii.  p.  835. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY   JUDiEAN   MINISTRY.  137 

cance.      Not    only   does   our    Lord    restore   the   helpless 
paralytic,1  but  commands  him  to  rise  up  and 

.  .  .  John  v.  8. 

bear  his  bed,  and  thus  practically  evince  not 
only  his  own  completed  recovery,  but  the  true  lordship  of 
the  Son  of  Man  over  Sabbatical  restrictions  and  ceremo- 
nial rest.2     He  that  a  year  before  had  shown  that  He  was 
Lord  of  the  temple,  now  shows  that  He  is 

r  Ch.  ii.  19. 

Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath.  But  this  was  what 
Pharisaical  hypocrisy  could  not  brook.  This  act,  merciful 
and  miraculous  as  it  was,  involved  a  violation  of  what 
Scribe  and  Pharisee  affected  to  hold  most  dear;  and  it 
could  not  and  must  not  be  tolerated.  The  Jews,  or  —  as 
that  term  nearly  always  implies  in  St.  John  —  the  adhe- 
rents of  the  Sanhedrin,8  who  had  been  informed  by  the 
man  who  it  was  that  had  healed  him,4  and  some  of  whom 


1  For  an  explanation  of  the  various  details  of  the  miracle,  the  student  must  be 
referred  to  the  standard  commentaries,  especially  those  of  Chrysostom,  Cyril  of 
Alexandria,  Theophylact,  and  Euthymius;  and,  among  more  modern  writers, 
those  of  Maldonatus,  Llicke,  Meyer,  and  Alford.  See  also  the  fragmentary 
homily  of  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  (  Works,  p.  336,  ed.  Bened.),  Hall,  Contemplations, 
iv.  11,  and  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  243. 

2  It  would  certainly  seem,  as  Lightfoot  suggests  {Hor.  Hebr.  in  loc.  Vol.  ii.  p. 
C22),  that  our  Lord  desired  by  this  command  to  show  His  power  over  the  Sab- 
bath, and  to  exhibit  openly  His  condemnation  of  the  ceremonial  restrictions 
with  which  it  was  then  encumbered.  For  some  striking  instances  of  these,  see 
especially  the  Mishna,  Tract,  "  Sabbath,"  p.  37  sq.  (De  Sola  and  Itaphall),  where 
the  case  of  an  act  of  charity  (relieving  a  mendicant)  forms  the  subject  of  dis- 
cussion. We  may  infer  what  must  have  been  the  amount  of  glosses  with  which 
the  law  respecting  the  Sabbath  was  now  encumbered,  when  in  the  above  formal 
collection  of  the  precepts  of  the  oral  law,  committed  to  writing  little  more  than 
one  hundred  and  fifty  years  afterwards,  we  find  that,  "a  tailor  must  not  go  out 
with  his  medic  near  dusk  [on  the  Sabbath  eve],  lest  he  forget  and  carry  it  out 
with  him  [during  the  Sabbath].  Mishna,  Tract,  "  Sabbath,"  I.  3,  p.  38  (De  Sola 
ami  Rap  hall). 

3  See  above,  p.  115,  note  3.  The  only  and  indeed  obvious  exception  to  this  is 
when  the  term  'IouSaToj  is  used  with  a  national  reference  (John  ii.  6, 13,  iii.  1,  iv. 
ii.  al.);  in  all  other  cases  the  term  in  St.  John's  Gospel  seems  to  mark  the  hostile 
and  hierarchical  party  that  especially  opposed  our  blessed  Lord's  teaching  and 
ministry. 

•i  There  does  not  seem  sufficient  reason  for  supposing  that  the  man  made  the 
communication  from  gratitude,  or  from  a  desire  to  commend  our  Lord  to  the 
rulers  (comp.  ChryB.,  Cyril  Alex.);  still  less  was  it  from  any  evil  motive  (conip. 
Lange,  p.  70'.i).  It  probably  arose  simply  from  a  desire  to  justify  his  performance 
Of  tliv  command  (ver.  9),  by  specifying  the  authority  under  which  he  had  acted. 
Comp.  Meyer  in  loc,  and  Lutuardt,  Jok.  F.cauy.  Part  n.  pp.  6,  7. 

12* 


138  THE   EARLY  JULIAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

had  perhaps  witnessed  the  miracle,  at  once  begin  to  ex- 
hibit a  vengeful1  hatred,  which  only  deepens 
Johnv.  16.  .......  .  .  . 

in  its  implacability  when  in  that  sublime  dis- 
course at  the  close  of  the  chapter  on  which  we  are  meditat- 
ing, the  fifth  chapter  of  St.  John,  the  Lord  declares  not 
only  His    unity  in  working,  but   His    unity 

Ver.V.  •  t 

in    dignity    and    honor    with    the    Eternal 

Ver.  23.  _,      .  „ 

Father.2 
This  is  the  turning  point  in  the  Gospel  history.     Up  to 
_.  .    .     ,        this  time  the  preaching  of  our  Lord  at  Jeru- 

JnsUnctive  char-  x  ° 

acterutics  of  this     salem  and  in  Judaea  has  met  with  a  certain 

epoch.  m 

degree  of  toleration,  and  in  many  cases  even 
of  acceptance  :3  but  after  this  all  becomes  changed.  Hence- 
forth the  city  of  David  is  no  meet  or  safe  abode  for  the 
Son  of  David ;  the  earthly  house  of  His  heavenly  Father 
is  no  longer  a  secure  hall  of  audience  for  the  preaching  of 
the  Eternal  Son.  Henceforth  the  Judaean,  or,  more  strictly 
speaking,  the  Jerusalem  ministry  narrows  itself  into  two 
efforts,  the  one  made  seven,  the  other  nine  months  after- 


1  This  perhaps  is  the  strongest  term  that  we  are  fairly  justified  in  using,  as  the 
words  Kal  i^rovi/  avrhv  airoKTe?uai  (ver.  16)  are  omitted  by  three  out  of  the 
four  leading  uncial  MSS.    See  Teschendorf  in  loc.  Vol.  i.  p.  577. 

2  A  very  careful  investigation  into  the  connection  and  evolution  of  thought  in 
this  divine  discourse  —  the  main  subject  of  which  is  the  Person,  Mission,  and 
Offices  of  the  eternal  Son  of  the  eternal  Father,  and  the  testimony  by  which 
they  are  confirmed  —  will  be  found  iu  Luthardt,  Johann.  Evang.  Part  n.  p.  10 
sq.  See  also  Stier,  Words  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  v.  p.  83  sq.  (Clark),  and  Lange, 
Leben  Jesu,  n.  5.  1,  Part  II.  pp.  770 — 775.  The  whole  is  ably  expanded  and 
enlarged  upon  by  Augustine,  in  Joannem,  Tract,  xvm. — xxm.  Vol.  iii.  p.  1355 
sq. 

3  See  John  ii.  23,  iv.  1.  In  estimating  the  degree  of  reception  that  our  Lord's 
teaching  met  with,  we  must  carefully  distinguish  between  the  general  mass  of 
the  people,  whether  in  Judaea  or  Galilee,  which  commouly  "heard  him  gladly" 
(Mark  xii.  37),  and  the  Pharisaical  and  hierarchical  party,  which  both  disbelieved 
themselves,  and,  commonly  acting  from  Jerusalem  as  a  centre  (see  esp.  Matt.  xv. 
1,  Mark  iii.  22,  vii.  1),  readily  organized  cooperation  in  other  quarters.  Compare 
Luke  v.  17.  Their  present  state  of  feeling  deserves  particular  notice,  as  prepar- 
ing us  for  their  future  machinations,  and  as  leading  us  to  expect  no  such  pro- 
longed duration  of  our  Lord's  ministry  as  the  supposition  that  tins  feast  was 
a  Passover  would  force  us  to  assume.  The  fearful  resolve  to  kill  our  Lord, 
though  perhaps  not  officially  expressed,  had  nevertheless  now  been  distinctly 
formed,  and  was  being  acted  upon.  See  John  v.  IS,  and  comp.  Lange,  Leben 
Jesu,  ii.  5.  1,  Part  II.  p.  709  sq. 


Lect.  III.  THE   EARLY  JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  139 

wards,1  and  both  marked  by  a  similar  vindictive  animosity, 
on  the  part  of  the  hostile  Jewish  section,  to 
that  which  now  first  comes  into  such  melan-     aiJ^m  l'"l"'x>'  r' 
choly   prominence.     Abruptly,  as   it   would 
seem,  perhaps  only  a  day  or  two  after  this  eventful  Sab- 
bath,-' the  Lord  leaves  Jerusalem,  to  return  to  His  old  home 
in  Galilee ;    there,  alas,  to  meet  with  a  yet  sadder  rejec- 
tion, and  to  withdraw  from  hands  more  sav- 
age and  murderous  than  those  even  of  the        „ ..  .      s?' 

&  Luke  iv.  28. 

Pharisees  of  Jerusalem. 

With  this  return  to  Galilee,  —  which  is  implied  in  the 
interval  between  the  fifth  and  sixth  chapters 

The  termination 

of  St.  John,  and  which  has  been  supposed,     o/theeariyjudaian 

it  i-i  i"!i  tiiinistry. 

though  1  cannot  think  correctly,   by  a  recent 

sacred    chronologer,4   as   identical    with   the         MartuUt 

departure   or  return  to  Galilee  specified  by 

all  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists,  —  this  portion  of  our 

history  comes  to  its  conclusion. 

1  The  first  of  these  was  at  our  Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem,  during  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles,  towards  the  middle  of  October  in  the  present  year,  a.  u.  c.  782 
(John  vii.  1  sq.,  comp.  Luke  ix.  51  sq.);  the  second  at  His  appearance  in  Jerusa- 
lem at  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication,  in  the  December  of  the  same  year  (John  x. 
22  sq.). 

i!  When  our  Lord  left  Jerusalem  is  not  mentioned,  or  even  implied,  but  after 
the  impious  efforts  directed  against  His  life  we  may  reasonably  conclude  that  it 
was  immediately,  —  the  very  day,  perhaps,  after  the  present  Sabbath,  and  thus 
with  fully  sufficient  time  to  reach  Galilee  and  Nazareth  before  the  Sabbath 
which  succeeded.    Comp.  Wieeeler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  222,  2C0  sq. 

3  See  above,  p.  127,  note  2,  and  the  beginning  of  the  next  Lecture,  where  this 
question  is  noticed  more  at  length. 

•4  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  161  sq..  compared  with  p.  223.  This  oppor- 
tunity may  proper!]  be  taken  of  especially  recommending  to  the  attention  of 
every  thoughtful  student,  who  may  in-  acquainted  with  the  language  in  which  it 
is  written,  this  able  treatise  on  the  succession  of  the  events  in  the  Gospel-history. 
The  more  recent  Synopsis  BvangeUca  of  Teschendorf  is  based  nearly  entirely 
upon  the  researches  and  deductions  of  this  keen-sighted  writer,  and  the  present 
work  owes  :i  ver\  large  pari  of  what  may  be  thought  plausible  or  probable  in  its 
ohronologioal  arrangement  to  the  same  Intelligent  guide.  It  is  jus!  to  state  that 
nothing  has  been  accepted  without  independent  and  very  deliberate  investiga- 
tion, and  that  many  modifications,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  rectifications  have 
been  Introduced.  The  clew,  however,  even  where  it  has  been  judged  to  lead  off 
in  a  different  direction,  has  in  most  oases,  I  again  most  gratefully  acknow 
either  been  Indicated  or  supplied  by  this  excellent  work.  A  translation  of  it 
would  be  a  \er\  welcome  aid  to  the  general  reader. 


140  THE   EARLY   JUD.EAN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

Thus,  then,  what  has  been  roughly  termed  the  Judaean 
ministry  —  a  ministry  extending  continuously  from  the 
March  to  the  December  of  the  preceding  year  (a.  u.  c.  781), 
and  resumed  only  to  be  abruptly  broken  off  in  the  March 
of  the  present  year  (a.  u.  c.  782)  —  may  be  considered  as 
now  practically  ended.1  This  is  immediately  succeeded 
by  the  ministry  in  Galilee,  and  in  the  neighboring  districts 
to  the  north  and  east,  —  a  ministry,  be  it  again  observed, 
to  which  the  principal  portion  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels, 
especially  of  the  first  and  second,2  is  nearly  exclusively 
confined.  If  we  only  steadily  bear  in  mind  that  the  Syn- 
optical Gospels  mainly  relate  to  us  the  events  of  the  min- 
istry in  Galilee,  the  rough  starting-point  of  which  is  the 
Baptist's  captivity,3  we  shall,  I  venture  to  feel  confident, 
find  but  little  difficulty  in  appreciating  the  true  relations 
to  one  another  of  the  four  Gospels,  and  in  mastering  the 
general  outline  of  the  succeeding  portions  of  the  Evan- 
gelical narrative. 

And   now  let   me   close   this   lecture  with  the    earnest 

1  The  short  period  of  two  months  which  intervenes  between  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  and  the  Feast  of  the  Dedication  was  probably  spent  in  Judaea  (see 
Lecture  VI.),  and  thus  might  properly  be  considered  a  portion  of  the  Judaean 
ministry.  The  general  reader,  however,  will  find  it  more  convenient  to  regard 
the  main  Judaean  ministry  as  now  past,  the  Galilaean  ministry  as  about  to  follow, 
and  to  be  succeeded  by  a  period  of  broken  and  interrupted  ministrations,  of 
removals  and  journeys,  which  terminate  with  the  last  Passover.  See  above, 
Lect.  ii.  p.  51. 

2  It  seems  necessary  to  make  this  limitation,  as  the  Gospel  of  St.  Luke  from 
the  close  of  the  ninth  to  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  chapter —  a  very  consid- 
erable portion  of  that  Gospel  — is  occupied  with  notices  of  that  portion  of  our 
Lord's  ministry  which  intervened  between  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  (October, 
A.  u.  c.  782)  and  the  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem  just  preceding  the  last  Pass- 
over (April,  a.  u.  c.  783). 

3  See  above,  p.  127,  note  2.  The  ancient  tradition  on  which  this  very  reason- 
able opinion  mainly  rests  is  cited  below,  p.  146,  note  1.  The  reason  why  the 
Synoptical  Evangelists  leave  unnoticed  the  early  ministry  in  Juda;a  cannot,  per- 
haps, be  readily  assigned.  As,  however,  it  seems  certain  that  nearly  every  system 
of  chronology  must,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  concede  the  fact,  we  may,  with 
all  humility  and  reverence,  perhaps  hazard  the  opinion  that  these  Evangelists 
were  specially  directed  and  guided  mainly  to  confine  their  narrative  to  the 
period  of  the  ministry  in  Galilee,  —  a  period  so  marked,  not  only  by  the  found- 
ing of  the  Church,  but  by  the  exhibition  of  many  and  mighty  miracles,  and  the 
communication  of  varied  and  manifold  forms  of  heavenly  teaching.  Compare 
Wieseler,  Chron.  Syno2)s.  p.  261. 


Lect.  Iir.  THE   EARLY   JULVEAN   MINISTRY.  141 

prayer  that  these  hasty  and  fleeting  sketches1  may  have  in 
some  decree  served  to  bring  this  portion  of        „    , 

°  .  Limchuhng    re- 

the  history  of  our  Redeemer  before  our  minds  marks tmdexhorta- 
with  increased  measures  of  freshness  and 
coherence.  Hard  it  has  been,  very  hard,  to  adjust  the 
many  questions  of  contested  history ;  harder  still  to  know 
where  to  enlarge  or  where  to  be  brief  only  in  unfolding  the 
connection  of  events  which  are  still  regarded  by  the  wise 
and  meditative  as  in  uncertain  dependence,  or  in  more 
than  precarious  sequence.  Yet  I  trust  all  has  not  been  in 
vain  ;  I  trust  that  in  you,  my  younger  brethren,  more  espe- 
cially,2 I  have  awakened  some  desire  to  search  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  to  muse  on  the  events  of  your  Redeemer's  life 
with  a  fresher  and  more  vital  interest.  Remember,  I  be- 
seech you,  that  though  chronologies  may  seem  perplexing 
and  events  intermingled,  yet  still  that  every  earnest  effort 
to  bring  before  your  hearts  the  living  picture  of  your 
Redeemer's  life  will  be  blessed  by  His  Spirit.3  Be  not 
discouraged  by  the  difficulty  of  the  task;    though  here, 


1  This  is  the  term  which  is  most  appropriate  to  these  Lectures,  and  which 
would  have  appeared  on  the  very  title-page  if  it  had  not  been  deemed  unsuitable 
to  place  a  term  so  purely  belonging  to  mere  human  things  in  connection  with 
the  most  holy  name  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 

2  Some  experience  as  a  public  examiner  in  the  New  Testament,  both  in  this 
University  and  elsewhere,  has  served  to  teach  me  that  few  points  connected 
with  the  exposition  of  the  four  Gospels  are  less  known  or  less  attended  to,  by 
the  young,  than  the  study  of  the  probable  order  of  events,  and  the  relations 
and  degrees  of  interdependence  existing  between  the  records  of  the  four  inspired 

\\  1  itiTS. 

8  It  is  well  and  truly  observed  by  Bishop  Taylor,  in  his  noble  introduction  to 
his  greatest  work,  The  /.if:  qf  Christ,  that  every  true  and  sincere  effort  to  set 
before  oar  souls  the  life  of  our  .Master  both  ought  to  and,  with  God's  blessing, 
mu-t  needs  end  in  imitation.  "  lie  that  Considers,"  says  the  Chrysostom  of  our 
Church,  in  reference  to  one  particular  aspect  of  our  Lord's  life,  "with  what 
effusions  of  love  Jesus  prayed,  —  what  fervors  and  assiduity,  what  innocency  of 
wish,  what  modesty  of  posture,  what  subordination  to  His  Father,  and  con- 
formity to  the  Divine  pleasure,  were  in  all  His  devotions,  —  is  taught  and  excited 
to  holy  and  religious  prayer.  The  rare  sweetness  of  His  deportment  in  all 
ti  mptations  and  violences  of  His  passion,  His  charity  to  II is  enemies,  His  sharp 
reprehension  of  the  Scribes  ami  Pharisees,  Bis  Ingenuity  toward  all  men,  are 
living  and  effectual  sermons  to  teach  us  patience  and  humility  and  zeal,  and 
candid  simplicity  and  justice  iu  all  our  actions." — Life  of  Christ,  Prelim.  Exhort. 
{  15,  Vol.  i.  p.  25  (Loud.  183G). 


142  THE   EARLY   JUD^AN   MINISTRY.  Lect.  III. 

perchance,  we  may  wander;  there  miss  the  right  clew; 
yet,  if  with  a  true  and  living  faith  we  seek  to  bring  home 
to  our  hearts  the  great  features  of  the  Evangelical  history, 
—  to  journey  with  our  Master  over  the  lonely  mountains 
of  Galilee;  to  sit  with  Him  beside  the  busy  waters  of  the 
lake  of  Gennesareth ;  to  follow  His  footsteps  into  remote 
and  half-pagan  lands,1  or  to  hang  on  His  lips  in  the  courts 
of  His  Father's  house,  —  we  shall  not  seek  in  vain.  The 
history  of  the  Gospels  will  be  more  and  more  to  us  a  liv- 
ing history ;  one  Divine  Image  ever  waxing  cleai'er  and 
brighter,  —  shedding  its  light  on  lonely  hours,  coming  up 
before  us  in  solitary  walks,  ever  fresher,  ever  dearer,  — 
until  at  length  all  things  will  seem  so  close,  so  near,  so  true, 
that  our  faith  in  Jesus  and  Him  crucified  will  be  such 
as  no  sophistry  can  weaken,  no  doubtfulness  becloud.2 

For  that  vivid  interest  in  the  history  of  Jesus  let  us  all 

pray  to  our  heavenly  Father;  and  in  the  name  of  Him  on 

whom  we  have  been  meditating,  let  us  con- 

Lttke  xvii.  5. 

elude  with  the  prayer  of  His  chosen  ones, 
"  Lord,  increase  our  faith." 

1  This  striking  and  commonly  too  much  overlooked  portion  of  our  Lord's 
ministry  will  be  found  noticed  especially  in  Lect.  v. 

2  For  an  expansion  of  these  passing  comments  on  the  unspeakable  blessedness 
of  this  form  of  meditative  union  with  our  adorable  Saviour,  the  student  may 
profitably  be  referred  to  one  of  the  most  eloquent  devotional  treatises  ever 
written  in  our  language,  —  the  Christ  Mystical  of  Bp.  Hall  (  Works,  Vol.  vii.  p. 
225.    Talboys,  1837). 


LECTURE   IV. 

THE  MINISTRY   IN  EASTERN  GALILEE. 

NOW    AFTER    TIIAT    JOHN    WAS    PUT    IN    PRISON,  JESUS    CAME    INTO    GALILEE, 
PREACHING  THE  GOSPEL  OB"  THE   KINGDOM   OF  GOD.  —  St.  Mark  i.  14. 

In  resuming  my  course  of  Lectures  upon  those  events 
in  the  life  of  our  Lord  and  Master  which  are 
recorded  to  us  in  the  Gospels,  it  will  be  per-  J^0"^"6 
haps  well  for  me,  both  in  consideration  of  the 
time  that  has  elapsed  since  my  last  Lecture,1  and  with  the 
remembrance  that  some  may  now  be  present  who  did  not 
hear  the  former  portion  of  this  course,2  so  far  to  recapitu- 
late as  to  remind  you  briefly  of  our  present  position  in  the 
Gospel-history,  and  of  the  events  which  appear  to  have  just 
preceded  our  present  starting-point. 

It  may  perhaps  be  remembered  that  our  last  meditations 
were  devoted  to  what  we  agreed  to  term  our 
Lord's  early  Judaean  ministry,3— a  ministry     £%£*££ 
which  commenced  with  the  cleansing  of  the     *£**"*  """"" 
Temple  at  our  Lord's  first  Passover  (March 
A.  u.  c.  781),4  and  extended  continuously  to  the  December 

l  Tlie  first  three  Lectures  of  tliis  course  were  delivered  in  the  month  of  April, 
the  present  and  the  two  following  not  till  the  succeeding  October.  The  brief 
recapitulation  in  the  text  could  thus  hardly  be  dispensed  with,  when  so  long  an 
interval  had  elapsed  between  the  two  portions  of  the  course.  In  the  form  in 
which  the  Lectures  now  appear  it  is  not  so  necessary  ;  as,  however,  it  has  seemed 
probable  that,  in  8  subject  like  the  present,  a  brief  recapitulation  might  be  of 
benefit  even  to  the  general  reader,  the  Lecture  has  been  left  in  the  same  statu  iu 
which  it  was  delivered. 

'■i  This  refers  to  the  new-comers  in  the  October  term.  Sec  the  remarks  in 
Lecture  I.  p.  20. 

•"•  See  Lecture  II.  p.  51,  and  compare  p.  140,  note  1. 

i  If  the  tables  constructed  by  Wieseler  ( Citron.  Synopx.  ]>.  482  so,.;  reprinted 
in  Tischendorf,  Synops.  Evany,  p.  li.)  ou  the  basis  of  astronominal  data  sup- 


144  THE   MINISTRY  IN  EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

of  that  year  when  our  Lord  returned  to  Galilee  through 
Samaria,  and  performed  the  second  and,  as  it  would  seem, 
isolated  miracle  of  healing  the  son  of  the  nobleman  of 
Capernaum.1  It  may  be  further  remembered  that  after  a 
brief  stay  in  Galilee,  —  of  which  we  have  no  further  record 
than  the  passing  comment  of  St.  Luke,  that  "lie  taught 
Ch  .   ]5  in  their  synagogues,  being  glorified  of  all,"2 

ch.  if.  i7.  and  the  similarly  brief  notices  of  St.  Matthew 

and  St.  Mark,  that  the  burden  of  that  teach- 
ing was  repentance,  — our  Lord  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  at  the 
time  of  a  festival,  which  it  was  judged  highly  probable  was 
that  of  Purim,  with  the  apparent  intention  of  staying  over 

plied  by  Wurm  (Astron.  Beitragc)  are  to  be  relied  on  as  exact,  the  first  day  of 
this  Passover,  i.  e.  according  to  popular  usage,  the  fourteenth  of  Nisan  took 
place  on  the  twenty-ninth  of  March.  One  day  earlier  (March  2S)  is  the  date 
specified  by  Browne  [Ordo  Seed.  §  64),  but  the  Tables  from  which  it  appears  to 
have  been  derived  (§  448)  are  admitted  to  involve  sufficient  error  to  account  for 
the  difference.    See  the  examples  on  p.  497. 

1  See  above,  Lect.  in.  p  131. 

2  This  text  appears  to  illustrate,  if  not  confirm,  the  opinion  previously  advanced 
(?ee  above,  p.  127,  note  2),  that  the  return  of  our  Lord  specified  by  the  three 
Synoptical  Evangelists  (Matt.  iv.  12,  Mark  i.  14,  Luke  iv.  14)  does  not  coincide 
with  the  interval  between  the  fifth  and  sixth  chapters  of  St.  John,  but  with  the 
return  specified  by  that  Evangelist  in  the  fourth  chapter.  The  words  of  St. 
Luke  just  seem  to  give  that  passing  notice  of  the  two-month  residence  in  Galilee, 
which  preceded  the  Feast  of  Purim,  that  we  might  naturally  expect.  The  chief 
feature  which  probably  marked  that  period,  preaching  and  teaching  in  the 
synagogues,  is  briefly  specified,  while  in  the  words  Bo^a^o/xevos  vTrh  Travrwu  it  is 
just  possible  that  there  may  be  an  oblique  allusion  to  the  miracle  which  we 
know  from  St.  John  (ch.  iv.  44)  was  performed  during  that  interval.  The  force 
of  the  main  objection,  that  the  Synoptical  narrative  does  not  thus,  as  it  would 
seem  to  profess  to  do,  commence  immediately  after  that  return  of  our  Lord  to 
Galilee,  but  really  two  months  later,  is  thus  so  far  weakened,  that  when  we 
further  observe, — (a)  that  of  two  returns  to  Galilee,  St.  John  pauses  carefully 
to  specify  one,  and  leaves  the  other  almost  unnoticed  (comp.  ch.  vi.  1),  and 
again,  (6)  that  in  ch.  v.  35  our  Lord  seems  to  speak  of  John's  ministry  as  some- 
thing now  quite  belonging  to  the  past,  it  appears  difficult  to  resist  the  convic- 
tion that  the  distinctly-mentioned  avaxupyvis  into  Galilee  of  the  Synoptical 
writers,  immediately  after  John's  captivity,  is  identical  with  the  carefully  speci- 
fied journey  recorded  in  the  fourth  chapter  of  St.  John.  See  Teschendorf, 
Synopsis  E rang-  lieu,  p.  xxv  ,  and  for  the  arguments  (not  very  strong)  in  favor 
of  the  identity  of  the  above  return  with  that  implied  in  John  vi.  1,  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Synops.  p.  161  s<;.  The  attempt  of  Lange  {Lcben  Jesu,  Part  n.)  and 
others  to  interpolate  a  considerable  portion  of  the  events  of  the  present  earlier 
Galilean  ministry  betieeen  the  return  through  Samaria  and  the  Feast  of  Purim 
has  been  well  considered,  and  been  found  to  involve  chronological  difficulties 
wholly  insurmountable. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  145 

the  Passover,1  but  that,  owing  to  the  malignity  of  the  more 
hostile  section  of  the  Jews,  He  appears  to  have  left  the 
city  almost  immediately,  and  again  to  have  returned  to 
Galilee. 

Here  our  present  section  begins,  and  with  it  what  may 
be  termed  the  Lord's  Galiloean  or  extra-Judaean  ministry, — 
a  ministry  which  in   itself  lasted   about   six  months,  but 
which,  combined  with  the  journeys  and  interrupted  minis- 
tries which    succeeded,  occupied   as   nearly  as  possible   a 
single  year,2  —  the  "  acceptable  year  "  of  that 
ancient   prophecy  which  our  Lord  Himself        Luke7v'zi 
proclaimed  in  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth  as 
now  receiving  its  fulfilment, — the  year  to  which  a  most 


1  See  above,  p.  135,  note  3. 

2  The  ministry  of  our  Lord  would  thus  seem  to  have  lasted  about  two  years 
and  three  months,  i.  e.  from  His  baptism  at  the  close  of  27  a.  d.  (780  a.  u.  c.)  or 
beginning  of  28  a.  d.  to  the  last  Passover  in  30  a.  d.  The  opinions  on  this  sub- 
ject have  been  apparently  as  much  divided  in  ancient  as  in  modern  times. 
Several  early  writers,  among  whom  may  be  specified  Clement  of  Alexandria 
(.Strom.  1.  21,  $  145),  Origen  (de  Princip.  iv.  5,  in  Levit.  Horn,  ix.,  in  Luc.  Horn. 
XXXII.,  but  see  below),  Archelaus  of  Mesopotamia  (Routh,  Reliq.  Sacr.  Vol. 
iv.  p.  218),  and,  according  to  apparently  fair  inferences,  Julius  Africanus  (Gres- 
well,  Dissert,  xm.  Vol.  i.  p.  4G),  suppose  our  Lord's  ministry  to  have  lasted 
tittle  more  than  one  ijear.  Others  again,  of  equal  or  even  greater  antiquity,  such 
as  Melito  of  Sardis  (Routh, Reliq.  Sacr.  Vol.  i.  p.  115),  Irenaeus  (liar.  11. 39,  but 
see  below),  and,  according  to  correct  inferences,  Tertullian  (see  Kaye,  Eccl.  Hist. 
ch.  11.  p.  159,  and  compare  Browne,  Onto  Seed.  §  86.  3),  and,  later  in  life,  Origen 
(Cels.  II.  12,  ou$t  rpia  trrj),  have  lixed  the  duration  as  three  years,  or,  as  Irenxus 
(I.e.)  implies,  even  more.  A  calm  consideration  of  these  and  other  passages 
from  early  writers  will  show  that  they  cannot  be  strongly  pressed  on  either  side. 
Several  of  them  involve  references  to  prophecy,  which  in  some  cases  evidently 
swayed  the  opinion  of  the  writer  (comp.  Euseb.  Dan.  Erang.  vm.  400  u);  some 
(as  the  passage  of  Irenaeus)  are  called  out  by  the  counter-opinion  of  heretics, 
while  others  again  are  mere  obiter  dicta,  that  cannot  fairly  be  urged  as  giving 
a  really  deliberate  opinion.  After  a  review  of  the  whole  evidence,  the  most 
reasonable  opinion,  and  one  which  tends  in  a  great  degree  to  harmonize  these 
citations,  is  this,  —  that  the  genera]  feeling  of  antiquity  was  that  our  Lord's 
inlirr  ministry  lasted  for  a  period,  speaking  roughly,  of  about  three  years,  but 
that  the  more  active  part,  i.  c.  that  with  which  the  synoptical  narrative  practically 
commences,  lasted  one.  It'  this  be  correct,  the  statement  at  the  beginning  of 
the  note  has  to  a  certain  extent  the  united  support  of  all  antiquity,  and  suf- 
ficiently nearly  accords  with  the  three  years  of  the  significant  parable  (Luke 
xiii.  6  sq.),  which  has,  perhaps  rightly,  been  prosed  into  this  controversy.  See 
\\  [1  eler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  202;  and  for  further  general  information,  Greswell, 
Dim  rt.  sin.  Vol.  i.  138  sq.,  Browne,  Ordo  Sad.  §  85  sq.,  and  the  acute  comments 
of  Anger,  de  Titnp.  in  Act.  Apost.  p  23  sq. 

13 


146  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.      Lect.  IV. 

trustworthy  tradition  preserved  by  Eusebius  confines  the 
narrative  of  the  three  Synoptical  Gospels.1 

Before  we  enter  upon  the  details  of  the  inspired  history, 
let  me  pause  to  make  two  preliminary  obser- 
oilr°vaHo*™ai'v  nations,  the  first  in  reference  to  the  space  of 
time  which  it  is  convenient  to  consider  in  the 
present  Lecture;  the  second  in  reference  to  the  variations 
of  order  in  the  events  as  related  in  this  portion  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels. 

With  regard  to  the  first  point,  we  may  observe  that  we 
m  .  J     have  now  before  us  the  events  of  a  year  and 

Ttie  exact  ■period  •> 

of  time  embraced  in     a  few  days,2  distributed,  however,  very  une- 

the present  Lecture.  n      •         i        /-i  i  •  /-\  ,. 

quallyin  the  Gospel-narrative.  Or  the  events 
of  the  first  portion,  which,  as  will  be  seen,  are  included  in 
a  period  of  little  more  than  three  weeks,  we  have  an  ample 
and  almost  continuous  history;  of  the  events  of  the  whole 
remaining  period  (excluding  the  final  week  of  our  Lord's 
ministry),  more  isolated  and  detached  notices,  and  a  some- 
what altered  mode  of  narration.  This  being  the  case,  I 
venture  to  think  that  we  shall  both  distribute  our  incidents 
more  equably,  and,  what  is  more  important,  keep  distinct 


1  The  valuable  tradition  above  alluded  to  is  as  follows:  "When  the  three  first 
written  Gospels  had  now  been  delivered  into  the  hands  of  all,  and  of  John  too 
as  well,  they  say  that  he  approved  of  them  and  bore  witness  to  their  truth,  and 
that  thus  all  that  the  history  lacked  was  an  account  of  the  things  done  by  Christ 
at  first  and  at  the  beginning  of  His  preaching.  And  the  account  is  certainly 
true.  For  it  is  easily  seen  that  the  other  three  Evangelists  have  only  written  an 
account  of  what  was  done  by  our  Saviour  in  the  space,  of  one  year  after  the 
imprisonment  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  that  they  have  intimated  the  same  at  the 
beginning  of  their  history."  —  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  ill.  24.  Compare  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Sijnops.  p.  1G3. 

2  The  first  event  is  the  rejection  of  our  Lord  on  His  appearance  in  the  syna- 
gogue at  Nazareth  (Luke  iv.  16).  This  we  know  was  on  a  Sabbath-day,  the  exact 
date  of  which  —  if  Wieseler's  Tables  (see  above,  p.  143,  note  4)  are  fully  to  be 
relied  on,  and  if  the  Feast  of  I'urim  fell,  as  it  appears  to  have  done,  on  the  Sab- 
bath when  our  Lord  healed  the  man  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda  (see  Lect.  ill.  p.  134) 
—  would  be  March  20.  The  l'assover  of  the  succeeding  year,  we  learn  from  the 
same  authority,  commenced  on  April  6.  We  have  then  exactly  a  year  and  eleven 
days.  The  calculation  by  which  the  week-day  answering  to  any  given  date  is 
arrived  at  will  be  greatly  facilitated  by  Tables  iv.  and  v.  in  Browne's  Ordo  Seed. 
p.  502  sq.  In  the  present  case  it  will  be  found  by  independent  computation  (hat, 
as  above  asserted,  March  20  coincided  with  a  Saturday. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN    EASTERN    GALILEE.  14.7 

from  one  another  portions  of  the  Gospels  which  appear 
to  be  dissimilar  in  their  general  characteristics,1  if  on  the 
present  occasion  we  confine  ourselves  solely  to  the  events 
of  the  three  weeks  above  alluded  to,  and  reserve  for  the 
remaining  Lectures  the  events  of  the  longer  portion.  The 
dividing  epoch,  let  it  be  observed,  is  that  of  the  feeding 
of  the  five  thousand, —  an  epoch  by  no  means  arbitrarily 
chosen,  but,  as  a  brief  chronological  notice 
in  St.  John  s  Gospel  warrants  our  asserting, 
an  epoch  closely  coincident  with  that  Passover  of  the 
present  year,2  which  the  savage  and  impious  designs  of 
the  Jewish  party  at  Jerusalem  appear  to  have  prevented 
our  Lord  from  celebrating  in  the  Holy  City.3  Estimating, 
then,  roughly  by  festivals,  our  present  period  extends  from 
the  Feast  of  Purim  (March  19,  a.  u.  c.  782)  to  the  Pass- 
over-eve (April  14),  at  which  point  our  present  medita- 
tions will  conveniently  come  to  their  close. 

With  regard  to  the  second  point,  —  the  order  of  the 
events  in  these  three  weeks,  let  me  briefly 

J  Ttie  variations  of 

observe  that  the  period  we  are  now  engaged     order  in  the  three 

,  , .   ,.        ,  ,         .  Synuidical  Oospeh. 

in  presents  the  utmost  difficulty  to  the  har- 
monist,4 arising  from  this  simple  fact,  that  though  all  the 


1  This  statement  will  be  substantiated  by  the  succeeding  comments  upon  the 
variations  of  order  in  the  fust  three  Evangelists  (p.  148),  and  by  the  introductory 
remarks  at  tin-  commencement  of  Lecture  IV.  The  main  points  to  be  observed 
are,  that  up  to  the  feeding  of  the  live  thousand  the  order  of  events  in  St.  Mat- 
tliew  appears  intentionally  modified,  after  that  period,  mainly  regular  and  sys- 
tematic; and  that  up  to  the  same  point  St.  Luke  is  full  and  explicit,  while  to  the 
six  months  between  that  period  and  the  journey  to  Jerusalem  at  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  he  only  devotes  about  thirty  verses. 

2  This  useful  conciliatory  date  is  commented  upon  by  Wieselcr,  Oiron.  Synops. 
p.  273.  To  set  aside  the  words  to  iraffxa.  as  a  gloss  (Maun,  True  Year  of  our 
Lard's  Birth,  p.  161;  comp.  Browne,  Ordo  Seed.  §  89)  is  arbitrary,  and  not  justi- 
lied  by  any  external  evidence. 

8  See  above,  p.  133,  note  3. 

•I  These  discrepancies  perhaps  can  never  be  wholly  cleared  up,  especially  iu 
those  cases  where  there  are  partial  notes  of  place  which  augment  the  already 
existing  difficulties  in  regard  Of  time.  To  take  an  example:  in  the  case  of  the 
healing  of  the  leper  recorded  in  the  three  Synoptical  Gospels,  independent  of 
all  the  difficulties  arising  from  the  difference  in  time,  the  scene  of  the  miracle  as 
defined  by  St.  Matthew,  KarafidyTi  8e  a'lTio  aTfb  rod  upovs  (ch.  viii.  1),  does  not 
Si .  in  to  accord  with  the  iv  pii  rwv  Tr6\ewv  of  St.  Luke  (ch.  v.  V2).     We  can,  of 


148  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

first  three  Evangelists  record  more  or  less  the  same  facts, 
St.  Matthew  relates  them  in  an  order  so  signally  and  pal- 
pably different  from  that  adopted  by  St.  Mark  and  St. 
Luke,  that  all  efforts  to  combine  the  two  must  be  pro- 
nounced simply  hopeless.1  Either  for  those  three  weeks 
we  must  accept  the  order  of  St.  Matthew  and  adapt  that 
of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  to  it,  or  we  must  adopt  the  con- 
verse course.  The  third  alternative,  that  of  constructing 
a  harmony  of  our  own  out  of  all  three,  —  an  alternative 
that  has  only  too  often  been  adopted  by  the  ingenious  and 
the  speculative,  —  is  in  a  high  degree  precarious,  and,  as 
far  as  I  am  able  to  judge,  has  not  led  to  any  other  than 
debatable  and  unsatisfactory  results. 

Without   here    entering   into    details,  which    delivered 
orally  would  prove  both  wearisome  and  perplexing,2 1  will 


course,  imagine  several  ways  in  which  the  two  accounts  could  be  harmonized, 
but  we  must  be  satisfied  with  merely  putting  them  forward  as  tentative  and 
conjectural.  At  first  sight  it  might  be  thought  judicious,  in  a  case  like  the  pres- 
ent, to  consider  the  special  notice  of  St.  Matthew  as  contrasted  with  the  more 
general  notices  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  as  definitely  fixing  both  the  time  and 
place  (comp.  Alford  on  Matt.  viii.  2),  but  a  remembrance  of  the  principle  of 
grouping,  which  appears  almost  evidently  to  have  been  followed  in  this  portion 
of  the  record  of  the  first  Evangelist  (comp.  Lecture  I.  p.  35),  warns  us  at  once 
that  all  such  eclectic  modes  of  harmonizing  can  never  be  relied  on,  and  that 
even  with  St.  Matthew's  accessory  definitions  the  order  of  the  events  he  relates 
must  to  the  last  remain  a  matter  of  uncertainty. 

1  Let  the  student  either  make  for  himself,  with  the  proper  notes  of  time  and 
place,  three  lists  of  the  events  in  their  order,  as  related  by  the  first  three  Evan- 
gelists, or  refer  to  those  drawn  up  by  others,  as,  for  instance,  by  Wieseler  (Chron. 
Synops.  pp.  280,  297),  Browne  (Ordo  Sacl.  §  586),  or  any  of  the  better  harmoniz- 
ers  of  this  portion  of  the  inspired  narrative,  and  he  will  feel  the  truth  of  this 
remark.  For  example,  if  1  ....  26  represent  in  order  the  events  of  this  period 
as  collected  from  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke,  the  order  in  St.  Matthew  will  be  found 
as  follows :  1,  2,  3,  5, 12,  6, 13,  4, 19,  20,  7,  8,  21,  23, 15,  9, 10, 18, 17,  22,  25,  26.  Such 
a  result  speaks  for  itself. 

2  To  conduct  such  an  inquiry  properly,  we  must  endeavor  (a)  to  form  a  correct 
idea  of  the  general  object  of  the  Gospel  in  question,  and  to  observe  how  far  this 
admits  of  its  being  made  the  basis  of  a  regular  and  continuous  Gospel-history; 
(6)  to  collect  all  the  passages  which  in  any  degree  indicate  the  principles,  anec- 
dotal or  historical,  on  which  the  Evangelist  appears  to  have  drawn  up  his  narra- 
tive; (c)  to  note  carefully  the  nature  and  amount  of  the  irregularities  which  can 
be  detected,  either  from  a  comparison  of  different  portions  of  the  same  Gospel 
with  one  another,  or  with  parallel  accounts  in  the  other  Gospels;  (d)  to  classify 
the  notes  optima  and  place,  and  to  observe  where  they  are  precise  and  definitive, 
and  where  merely  vague  and  indefinite;  lastly,  (e)  to  investigate  the  nature  of 


Thr  order  of  St, 
Murk  and  St.  Lvke 
followed  in  these 
Lectures, 


Lect.  IV.     THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  149 

simply  say,  that  after  long  and  careful  consideration,  and 
with  a  full  sense  of  the  great  responsibility 
of  making  distinct  assertions  on  such  diffi- 
cult questions  before  an  audience  like  the 
present,  I  have  come  to  the  determination 
of  following  the  order  of  events  as  given  by  St.  Mark 
and  St.  Luke,  rather  than  that  given  by  St.  Matthew, 
and  that  for  these  general  but  weighty  reasons.  First, 
that  in  cases  of  clear  discrepancy  in  the  order 

Z,  ,  First  reason. 

of   narration   between    two    of   the   sacred 
writers,  we  seem  bound  to  follow  the  one  who  himself 
tells  us,1  if  words  mean  anything,  that  it  has  been  his  care 
to  draw  up  his  history  with  general  reference  to  the  order 
of  events.     Secondly,  that  the   order  of  St. 

Second  reason. 

Luke  in  the   first  part  of  our  present  por- 
tion is  strikingly  confirmed  by  the  order  of  events  in  St. 
Mark,  from  which  it  only  differs  in  two  or  three  instances,2 


the  formulae  which  link  together  the  successive  paragraphs,  and  to  distinguish 
between  those  which  mark  immediate  connection  and  those  which  indicate 
mere  general  sequence.  The  first  of  these  heads  is  partially  illustrated  in  Lect. 
j.  p.  84;  the  rest  are  best  left  to  independent  observation.  If  assistance  be 
needed  in  reference  to  (li),  see  Davidson,  Introcl  to  2f.  T.  Vol.  i.  p.  5G,  or  Cred- 
ner,  Einkitung,  §  37,  p.  <!3  sq.;  in  ref.  to  (c),  Ureswell,  Dissert,  in.  Vol.  i.  p.  195 
sq.;  in  ref.  to  (f/),  the  table  in  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synoj>s.  p.  297  sq. ;  and  in  ref.  to 
(e),  Ebrard,  Kvitik  der  Ev.  Gesch.  §  23,  pp.  88—94- 

1  The  exact  meaning  of  some  of  the  expressions  in  this  introduction,  especially 
o.tt"  apx^is,  TTaprinoAJudriKOTi,  &vw&ev,  and  most  of  all  Ka^e£?js,  has  been  abun- 
dantly discussed.  The  most  correct  view  seems  to  be  as  follows:  that  apx^l 
refers  to  the  beginning  of  the  Trpay^xaroiv  previously  alluded  to.  scil.  twv  bav/xd- 
twv  koi  rail/  ■n-pa-yua.Tcoi',  Euthymius  in  lor.:  that  irapr)KoAov&iyc6Ti,  in  accord- 
ance both  with  its  use  and  derivation,  marks  research  as  evinced  in  tracing 
along,  and,  as  it  wire,  mentally  accompanying  the  events  in  question;  that 
Uvudev  refers  to  a  commencement  from  the  m  ry  beginning,  —  from  the  birth  of 
the  Baptist ;  and,  lastly,  that  Kadetfs,  like  tcptfiis,  can  only  imply  an  adherence 
to  the  natural  order  Of  the  events  related,  —  e£rjS  £>s  eKaffra  iyevero,  Thucyd. 
n.  1,  v.  26.  Bee  Meyer,  in  lor.,  and  compare  Grcswcll,  Dissert.  1.  Vol.  i.  p.  9. 
In  a  word,  in  this  preface  we  are  assured  by  the  inspired  writer  that  we  are  to 

■  \] "  c<  in  what  follows  fidelity,  accuracy,  research,  and  order;  and  we  find  them. 
ipare  Lange,  Leben  Jeau,  I.  6. 3.    Introd.  p.  220. 

2  These  are,  the  calling  of  the  four  Apostles  (Luke  v.  1—11,  compared  with 
Mark  i-  10—20),  the  arrival  of  the  mother  and  brethren  of  our  Lord  (Luke  viii. 
19  21,  compared  with  .Mark  hi.  31— 3J),  and  apparently  the  calumnies  of  the 
Pharisees  (Mark  iii.  20  sq.,  compared  with  Luke  xi.  17  sq.),  and  the  parable  of 
l!  "  (   i:,in  of  Mustard  (Luke  xiii.  IS  sq.,  compared  with  Mark  iv.  30  sq.),  though 

1.)* 


150  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

which  have  been  satisfactorily  accounted  for  and  adjusted. 
Thirdly,  that  the  chronology  of  St.  Luke  in 

Third  reason.  "1  .  . 

this  portion  of  the  Gospel  history  can  be 
shown  to  harmonize  with  that  supplied  indirectly  by  St. 
John    in    a   very    striking    manner.1      Fourthly,  that   the 

seeming    want    of   order    in    St.    Matthew 

Fourth  reason. 

can  be  very  readily  accounted  for  by  observ- 
ing that,  in  this  portion  of  his  Gospel,  the  Evangelist 
appears  to  have  wittingly  adopted  a  peculiar  arrangement, 
viz.,  a  separation  into  different  groups  of  the  discourses  of 
our  Lord  and  the  historical  events  with  which  they  stood 
in  connection,  and  that  such  an  arrangement  almost  neces- 
sarily precludes  strict  chronological  adjustments.  However 
perplexing  we  may  deem  such  a  phenomenon  in  a  Gospel 
that  in  other  parts  appears  mainly  to  follow  a  regular  and 
chronological  order,  —  however  we  may  be  tempted  to 
speculate  on  the  causes  which  led  to  it,2  this  much  appears 


both  these  might  well  have  been  repeated  on  two  different  occasions.  For  a 
good  adjustment  of  the  two  main  differences,  see  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  p. 
284  sq.,  and  in  respect  of  the  first  of  them,  compare  also  Augustine,  de  Consens. 
Ev.  ii.  17,  and  Spanhelm,  Dub.  Evang.  lxii.  2,  p.  341  sq. 

1  For  a  careful  investigation  into  the  confirmatory  elucidations  of  the  order  of 
this  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  as  supplied  by  that  of  St.  John,  see  Wieseler, 
Citron.  Synops.  in.  2  a,  p.  271  sq. 

2  Though  it  is  ever  both  unwise  and  unbecoming  to  speculate  too  freely  about 
the  origin  and  composition  of  an  inspired  document,  the  opinion  may  perhaps 
be  hazarded  that  this  peculiarity  in  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  may  be  due  to  the 
incorporation  by  the  Evangelist  of  an  earlier  (Hebrew)  narrative  in  this  later  and 
more  complete  (Greek)  Gospel.  If  such  a  conjecture  be  received,  we  can  not 
only  explain  the  present  peculiarity,  but  can  also  account  for,  on  the  one  hand, 
the  positive  statements  of  antiquity  that  the  first  Evangelist  composed  his  Gospel 
originally  in  Hebrew  (Papias  ap.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  in.  39,  Irenasus,  Beer.  in.  1. 
al.),  and,  on  the  other,  the  universal  reception  of  the  Greek  Gospel  as  the  verita- 
ble and  undoubted  work  of  the  Evangelist.  See  Wieseler,  Synops.  p.  304.  The 
portion  to  which  we  are  alluding  may  thus  have  been  a  part  of  the  Aoyta  which 
Papias  says  were  drawn  up  by  St.  Matthew,  and  the  meaning  of  the  doubtful 
word  \6yta  may  be  so  far  correctly  modified  as  to  point  to  a  predominance  in 
that  treatise  of  the  ra  inrb  XpiffTov  A6X^£J/T«  over  the  v)  irpax^^ra  which 
appears  also  included  in  the  term.  See  above,  Lect.  i.  p.  28,  note  3.  That  St. 
Matthew  originally  wrote  in  Hebrew  can  scarcely  be  doubted,  if  we  are  to  place 
any  reliance  on  external  testimony,  and  that  the  present  Greek  Gospel  came 
from  his  hand,  and  not  from  that  of  an  editor  or  compiler,  seems  almost  equally 
clear,  from  internal  and  external  testimony  combined ;  how  then  can  we  adjust 
the  two  apparent  facts  without  assuming  an  earlier  and  a  later  treatise?    And  if 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY    IN    EASTERN    GALILEE.  151 

certain,  that  such  an  arrangement  does  exist  and  can  be 
easily  verified,  if  Ave  examine  the  peculiar  structure  of  the 
portion  of  the  Gospel  which  begins  with  the  fifth  and 
closes  with  the  thirteenth  chapter.  We  see,  for  example, 
that  on  the  one  hand  we  have  three  large  portions  contain- 
ing discourses,  viz.  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  the  appar- 
ently grouped  and  collected  instructions  which  our  Lord 
addressed  to  the  Twelve  previous  to  their  mission,  and  the 
collection  of  the  parables  in  the  thirteenth  chapter ; l  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  that  we  have  a  large  collection  of  mira- 
cles related  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters,  which  com- 
prise,  with  scarcely  any  exception,  the  scattered  events  of 
the  period  preceding  the  sending  out  of  the  Twelve; 
after  which  the  narrative  proceeds  in  strict  chronological 
order.  When  we  add  to  this  the  concluding  observation, 
that,  singularly  enough,  we  find  in  several  instances  careful 
notices  of  place  exactly  where  the  order  of  time  seems 
most  disarranged,2  it  seems  almost  impossible  to  resist  the 
conviction  that  the  first  Evangelist  was  by  no  means  unac- 
quainted with  the  correct  order  of  events,  but  that  he 
designedly  departed  from  it,  and  directed  his  first  attention 
to  his  Master's  preaching  during  this  momentous  period, 
and  then  grouped  together  the  nearly  contemporary  events 
and  miracles,3  with  such  notices  of  place  as  should  guard 
against  any  possibility  of  misconception. 

bo,  is  it  strange  that  the  first  should  have  been  incorporated  in  the  second,  and 
thus  so  effectually  superseded  aS  to  have  soon  passed  out  of  notice?  The  preten- 
sions of  the  Curetonian  Byriac  (as  put  forward  by  its  laborious  editor)  to  repre- 
sent more  nearly  the  words  of  St.  Matthew  than  any  other  extant  document 
would  in  some  degree  affect  the  present  question,  if  it  had  not  apparently  been 
demonstrated  that  such  pretensions  arc  untenable.  See,  thus  far,  the  recent 
investigation  of  Roberts,  Original  Lang,  of  St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  ch.  iv.  8,  p. 
122  s< i  .  and  compare  l  lonaldson,  New  <  'rat.  §  15,  p.  23,  note  (ed.  3). 

J  1'or  a  brief  notice  of  these,  see  Lect.  I.  p.  30,  note  1,  and  for  a  specification  of 
the  miracles  in  the  eighth  and  ninth  chapters,  ib.,  note  2. 

2  Compare  for  example  eh.  viii.  5,  eiaeASoi/Ti  8«  aiircS  els  Ka.7rtpva.0viA. ;  ver. 
li,  iKdoif  els  tV  oiKiaf  Titrpov  ;  ver.  18,  els  rb  irepav;  ver.  28,  eh$6vTi  els  to 
irepav  els  Titv  x^Pav  T<*"/  Yfpy«Ti\vSiv  )  ch.  ix.  1,  ^Xfrev  els  ir)t>  ISlav  ir6\iv  ; 
ch.  xii.  'J,  iiKSev  els  t!ji/  ffwaycayrjif  avrOiv  ;  xiii.  1,  i£eh$wv  airb  tj/s  olnlas 
iKab7)To  itapa.  tt;</  StaXaanav.    See  also  Wleseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  ::(|7. 

•■:  The  want  of  regularity  in  St.  -Matthew's  Gospel,  arising  from  this  mode  of 


152  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.     Lect.  IV. 

Relying  on  these  sound  and  apparently  convincing  rea- 
sons for  following  the  order  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  rather 
than  that  of  St.  Matthew,  let  us  now  again  take  up  the 
thread  of  the  inspired  narrative. 
After  a  hasty  departure  from  Jerusalem  our  Lord  returns 
to  his  old  home  at  Nazareth,  where  some,  if 
Appearance  of    not  a\\  0f  t]ie  ki1Kired  of  the  Lord  appear  to 

our  Lord  in  the  st/n-  l  L 

agogue  at  Xaza-     ]iaVe  been  still  residing,1  and  on  the  Sabbath- 

reth.  _  °' 

Lukeiv.  ig.         day  which  immediately  succeeded  His  return 
entered  into  the  synagogue,  as  had  now  be- 
come His  custom,  to  read    and  to  teach.     What  a  vivid 
picture  has  the  inspired  vEvangelist  St.  Luke  been  moved 
to  present  to  us  of  that  memorable  morning.     Prayer  and 
the  reading  of  the  law  were  now  over2  and  the  reading  of 
the  prophets  was  to  begin,  and  the  reading  of  the  season 
was  from  the  old  Evangelist  Isaiah.   The  Re- 
cleemer  stands  up  to  read,  and,  with  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  now  not  improbably  expectant  ruler  of  that 


construction,  is  acknowledged  by  nearly  all  impartial  inquirers  of  recent  times. 
See  Greswell,  Dissert,  in.  p.  194 — 238;  Browne,  Ordo  Sued.  §  590,  whose  theory  of 
a  Redactor,  however,  is  neither  satisfactory  nor  plausible.  Attention  was 
formerly  called  to  it  by  Lightfoot  {Harmony,  Vol.  i.  p.  503,  Roterod.  1686),  and 
also  by  Whiston  (Harmony  of  Gospels,  p.  100  sq..  Loud.  1702),  but  accounted  for 
by  the  latter  in  a  way  (misarrangement  by  a  translator  of  fragmentary  scraps) 
which  Browne  (p.  644,  note)  properly  designates  as  palpably  absurd.  He  was 
answered  by  Jones,  Vindic.  of  St.  Matt.  Lond.  1719. 

1  It  has  been  supposed  that  the  Virgin  and  her  family  had  retired  to  Cana  (see 
above,  p.  107,  note  1),  but  apparently  not  on  sufficient  grounds.  That  the 
aSe\(pal  of  the  Lord  were  now  living  at  Nazareth  seems  certain  from  Matt.  xiii. 
56,  Mark  vi.  3,  and  that  the  Virgin  and  the  brethren  were  there  also  is  not 
improbable.  The  way,  however,  in  which  the  residence  of  the  a5s Atpal  is  speci- 
fied seems  rather  to  imply  the  contrary,  and  may  lead  us  to  conjecture  that  the 
Virgin  and  her  other  kindred  were  now  at  Capernaum,  a  place  which  they 
might  have  selected  for  their  abode  a  year  before  (John  ii.  12):  consider  Matt, 
xii.  46  sq.,  Mark  iii.  31  sq.,  Luke  viii.  19  sq.,  and  John  vii.  3.  The  commonly 
assumed  identity  of  this  visit  to  Nazareth  with  that  mentioned  Matt.  xiii.  54  sq., 
Mark  vi.  1  sq.,  is  convincingly  disproved  by  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  284. 

2  The  service  of  the  synagogue  commenced  with  praise  and  prayer;  then  a 
portion  of  the  law  was  read  aloud,  and  after  this  a  portion  from  the  prophets. 
See  Jost,  Gesch.  des  Judenth.  n.  1.  6,  Vol.  i.  p.  173  sq.,  the  special  treatise  of 
Vitringa  (de  Synag.),  the  more  modern  work  of  Zunz  (Gottesdienst.  Yortrdge. 
di  r  Juden.  ]i.  329,  sq.),  and  for  useful  references  illustrative  of  the  whole  passage, 
compare  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hcbr.  Vol.  ii.  p.  508  sq.  (Roterod.  1086). 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  153 

house  of  prayer,1  the  roll  is  delivered  to  Him  by  the  at- 
tendant. He  unfolds  it,  and  reads  that  striking  passage 
which  His  own  divine  wisdom  and  foreknowledge  had 
moved  Him  to  select,2 — that  passage  which 
both  in  its  specifications  of  time  and  circuni-  a6oiT!r"  "^  Ke 
stances  was  now  being  so  exactly  fulfilled. 

Such  words  might  well  have  aroused  the  attention  of 
those  that  hoard  it,  nor  can  we  wonder  that 

.  77(e  impious    $e- 

onr  Lord's  explanations3  were  looked  for  with     <?<& 
interest,  and  at  first  received  with  a  kind  of         ren2°- 
amazed  approval.    But  what  a  fearful  sequel! 
When  grave  yet  gracious  words  of  warning4  were  directed 
against  those  feelings  of  distrust  and  unbelief  into  which 


1  It  would  appear  that  our  Lord  by  rising  indicated  that,  as  a  member  of  the 
synagogue  of  Nazareth,  He  desired  on  the  present  occasion  to  undertake  the 
office  of  Maphtir,  or  reader  of  the  lesson  from  the  prophets.  Comp.  Vitringa, 
de  Synag.  in.  1.  7,  Part  n.  p.  690  sq.  Though  not  called  upon  by  the  ruler  of  the 
synagogue  (comp.  Mishna,  Tract  "  Megillah,''  iv.  4),  assent  is  at  once  given,  as 
both  the  ruler  and  the  congregation  appear  to  have  heard  of  the  comparatively 
recent  miracle  at  Capernaum  (Luke  iv.  23;  compare  WTieseler,  Chron.  Synops. 
p.  271),  and,  as  the  context  shows  (ver.  20),  were  full  of  expectation.  See  Light- 
foot,  in  loc.  Vol.  ii.  p.  608. 

-'  It  seems  probable  that  the  reading  of  the  season  was  from  Isaiah  (Lightfoot), 
and  that  our  Lord  received  accordingly  that  portion  of  Scripture  from  the 
attendant  keeper  of  the  sacred  books  [comp.  Vitringa,  Synagog.  m.  2.  2,  p.  89'J), 
but  thut,  with  the  privilege  which  the  oral  law  conceded  in  the  case  of  the  lesson 
from  the  prophets  (Mink na,  "Megillah,"  iv.  4),  lie  either  passed  over  from  the 
mm!  imi  of  the  day  to  the  beginning  of  the  sixty-lirst  chapter,  or  else,  as  '•  Lord  of 
the  Sabbath,"  specially  selected  that  portion.  See  Lightfoot,  Ilor.  II<  br.  Vol.  ii. 
p,  509,  and  comp.  Meyer  in  loc.  The  supposition  that  on  our  Lord"s  opening  the 
roll  this  passage  providentially  met  His  eye  (comp.  De  Wette),  is  not  improbable, 
but  apparently  less  in  accordance  with  the  avaiTTv^as,  which,  as  Lightfoot 
remarks,  seems  somewhat  more  than  the  mere1'  explicuit  or  aperuit  librum" 
(/.,-.  p.  .MO). 

3  After  having  read  such  a  portion  of  the  passage  as  by  custom  was  deemed 
sufficient  ("si  merit  Sabbato  interpres,  legunt  in  Propheta  versiculos  tres  ant 
qninque  ant  septem,  et  non  sunt  solicit!  de  versiculis  viginti  uno,"  Afassecketh 
Soph,  cap  12),  our  Lord  took  upon  Himself  the  odice  of  interpreter,  and,  accord- 
ing to  custom,  sat  down  to  perform  it.  Comp.  Zunz,  <;<>t/c.-«l.  Vortrage  tier Juden. 
p.887,  and  Sepp,  Leben  Christ;,  a.  10,  Tart  n.  p.  122. 

i  The  objections  that  bave  been  urged  against  the  general  character  of  this 
address  are  most  idle  and  irreverent.  Our  Lord,  who  knew  the  human  heart, 
saw  here  unbelief,  and  tin-  ordinary  (ialikcan  estimate  Of  His  divine  mission 
(John  iv.  4-"i),  in  their  worst  form-,  and  accordingly  adopts  the  language  of  merci- 
ful warning  and  reproof.  On  the  whole  incident,  see  some  useful  comment.-,  in 
Lange,  Leben  Jesu.  n.  4.  9,  Part  II.  p.  541  sq. 


154  THE   MINISTRY    IN    EASTERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

even  now  these  dull-hearted  men  of  Nazareth  were  fast 
falling  back  again,  we  remember  with  horror  what  followed, 
—  how  these  wretched  men  dared  to  do  what  even  the 
gainsayers  at  Jerusalem  a  week  before  had  only  begun  to 
think  of  doing,  how  they  thrust  Him  forth  not  only  from 
their  syna^osjue  and  their  town,  but  led  Him 

Per.29.  •    i  ,        .  •     ■  • 

to  a  neighboring  declivity,  which  modern 
travellers  have  not  doubtfully  identified,1  to  cast  Him 
down   headlong,  and   how  by  an   exercise   of  His   divine 

power2  lie  escaped  their  impious  and  ven<re- 

Ver.SO.  l  I  I  O 

ful  hands. 
Henceforth  that  quiet  home  in  the  bosom  of  the  green 
hills  of  Galilee  was  no  longer  to  be  the  Lord's 

Departure  in  and  .  ,  .  ,  TT.        ,.. 

aijode   at  caper-     earthly  resting  place.     His  divine  steps  were 
T"  ,  .   ,  now    turned    to    more    busy  scenes,  and,  in 

Jsaiali  KC.  \sq.  . 

accordance  with  the  voice  of  ancient  proph- 
ecy, to  the  people  that  sat  in  the  darkness  the  Light  came; 
and  in  Capernaum,  at  but  little  distance3  from  that  fair 
and  populous  plain  of  "Gennesar,"  which  a  nearly  contem- 
porary visitor  has  so  eloquently  described,4  the  rejected 

1  The  exact  place  to  which  these  wretched  and  infatuated  people  endeavored  to 
lead  our  Lord  was  certainly  not  the  traditional  Mount  of  Precipitation  overlook- 
ing the  vale  of  Esdraelon  and  two  miles  distant,  but  apparently  one  of  the  preci- 
pices of  the  western  hill  which  flanks  the  town,  —  perhaps  that  by  the  present 
Maronite  church.  See  Eobinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  335  (ed.  2);  and  compare 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  3G3  (ed.  2),  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  135.  In  the  photograph  of  Frith  {Syria  and  Palestine,  Tart  n.)this 
portion  of  the  western  hill  is  not  included.  See  Roberts,  Holy  Land,  Vol.  ii. 
Plate  29. 

2  There  does  not  seem  sufficient  reason  for  assuming,  with  Eobinson  and  others, 
that  in  this  there  was  no  exercise  of  that  miraculous  power  which  most  of  the 
ancient  writers  (Ambrose,  Euthynvius,  al.)  recognize  in  our  Lord's  thus  passing 
through  the  infuriated  throng.  So  also,  and  rightly,  Alford  in  toe.  In  all  these 
things  He  manifested  alike  the  exercise  of  His  divine  wisdom  and  His  divine 
power;  of  the  former  in  defining  the  time  in  which  He  vouchsafed  to  Buffer,  and  of 
the  latter  in  preventing  that  time  being  hurried  by  the  impiety  and  violence  of  men. 
As  Cyril  of  Alexandria  well  says,  "it  depended  on  Him  to  suffer,  or  not  to 
suffer;  for  He  is  the  Lord  of  times  as  well  as  of  things." — Comment,  on  St.  LuLr, 
Part  I.  p.  64,  where,  however,  it  is  just  to  observe  that  there  is  no  distinct  refer- 
ence to  an  exercise  of  miraculous  power,  but  rather  of  overawing  majesty.  So 
also  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  4.  9,  Part  ir.  p.  548. 

"•  As  to  the  supposed  position  of  Capernaum,  see  Lect.  in.  p.  121,  note  1. 

4  Sec  Josephus,  Bell.  Jud.  III.  10.  S,  —  according  to  Robinson  (Palestine,  Vol.  ii. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  155 

One   of  Nazareth  found  n  more  thankful   and   believing 

home.     More  thankful,  and  more  believing; 

for,  not  perhaps  without  a  fresh  recollection  of    J.Spec!al ?"" to  thc 

'  *  I  four  disciples. 

the  miracle  performed  on  one  who  had  lain 
sick  among  them  a  few  weeks  before,  the  peo-         Jo,m  iv-i0, 
pie,  we  are  told  by  St.  Luke,  "pressed  upon 
Him  to  hear  the  word  of  God;"  and  we  may 
well  conceive  that  it  was  not  without  the  deep  conscious- 
ness and  foreknowledge   of  the  active  ministry  that  was 
now  to  be  vouchsafed  amid  the  populous  towns  of  Gennes- 
areth,1  that  He  called  the  four  disciples,  who  had  already 
been  with  Him  for  above  a  year,  to  leave  on  this  occasion 
for  ever  their  earthly  occupations,  and  to  become  the  "fishers 
of  men."    And  we  know  how  readily  that  call 
was   obeyed  ;    we    know  how  St.  Peter   and 
his  brother,  and  the  two  sons  of  Thunder,  wrought  upon 
by  that  miracle  that  showed  how  the  crea- 
tures that  the  hand  of  the  Lord  had  made 

Ver.  9. 

could  gather  together  at  His  will,  —  that  mir- 
acle that  brought  the  impressible  Peter  on  his  knees,2  and 


p.  402)  an  overdrawn  picture.  Thomson,  with  more  judgment,  draws  a  distinc- 
tion between  what  (he  land  then  was  and  what  it  has  become  now.  Comp.  The 
Land  and  the  Bon!:,  Vol.  i.  p.  536. 

1  A  very  good  description  of  what  was  probably  the  state  of  this  populous 
district  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  is  given  by  Stanley.  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  371 
sq.  (ed.  2).  The  remark  that  "  it  was  to  the  Roman  Palestine  almost  what  the 
manufacturing  districts  are  to  England,"  is  apparent!}'  borne  out  by  the  indirect 
allusions  in  the  inspired  narrative  to  the  populous  nature  of  the  district,  and  by 
v.hat  we  Can  infer  from  the  ruins  which  arc  still  found  scattered  about  on  the 
western  shores  of  the  lake.  Compare  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol. ii.  p. 403.  The 
traces  of  buildings  wbioh  appear  to  have  been  used  in  the  operations  of  trade, 
and  may  be  the  remains  of  ancient  potteries,  tanneries,  etc.,  have  been  observed 
by  Dr.  Thomson  at  Tabiga,  which  he  terms  "  the  grand  manufacturing  suburb  of 
Capernaum."—  77/*  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  i.  p.  547. 

-  The  effect  which  the  miracle  produced  on  St.  Peter  is  well  commented  upon 
by  Olsbausen  [in  in,-.  Vol.  i.  p  299,  Clark),  and  by  Ewald,  Gesch.  Christus\  p. 
252.  The  contrast  between  his  own  conscious  anholiness  and  the  holy  majesty 
and  power  of  Him  who  had  j 1 1 - 1  wrought  the  mighty  miracle  made  the  fervid 
disciple  both  on  the  one  band  offer  his  spontaneous  adoration,  and  on  the  other 
to  beseech  bis  pure,  sinless  Lord  to  depart  from  one  who  Hit  and  knew  in  his 
own  bosom  what  Bin  was.  On  the  whole  miracle,  see  Olshausen,  Commentary, 
Vol.  i.  ]..  2S2  >'i  (<  lark);  Trench,  .Miracles,  p.  120;  and  compare  Lange,  /.••'•■  » 
.'•    ',  it.  i.  11,  Part  n.  p.  662  Bq. 


156  THE  MINISTRY  IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

filled  all  with  amazement,  —  obeyed  the  heavenly  voice, 
and  left  father  and  earthly  callings,  nets  and  vessels,  for- 
sook all,  and  followed  Him.1 

This  prompt  adhesion  of  men  so  well  known  in  Caper- 
naum as  two  at  least  of  the  four  must  have 
moiZcTuhelyna-     been,2  this  ready  giving  up  of  everything  to 

goaue    at     Caper-       foj^  ^  j^^  Qf  Nazarethj  CQuld  not  haye  been 

without  its  effect  on  the  people  of  Caper- 
naum and  its  neighborhood.  The  report,  too,  of  the  mira- 
cle, though,  perhaps,  as  yet  not  fully  understood  or  appre- 
ciated, had  probably  soon  passed  from  mouth  to  mouth 
among  the  fishers  and  boatmen  on  the  lake,  and  might 
well  have  added  to  the  prevailing  expectation  and  excite- 
ment.    We  may  readily  imagine,  then,  the  eagerness  and 

gladness  with  which  on  the  following  Sab- 

Marki.  21.  f5  ,  #s 

bath  the  Redeemer's  preaching  was  listened 
to  in  the  synagogue,  and  we  know  the  mighty  effect  that 
was  produced  by  it,  enhanced  as  it  was  by  the  subsequent 
healing  of  the  demoniac  within  its  walls.3  How  start- 
ling must  have  been  that  scene  when  the  spirits  of  dark- 
ness, driven  bv  the  wild  antagonisms  of  their 

Lvkciv.  34.  ... 

fears  and  malignities,  broke  out  amid  that 
mingled  concourse  into  cries  alike  of  reprobation  and  of 


1  There  seems  no  reason  for  doubting  that  the  call  of  the  four  disciples  men- 
tioned by  St.  Matthew  (ch.  iv.  18  sq.)  and  St.  Mark  (ch.  i.  16  sq.)  was  contempo- 
raneous with  the  above  call  mentioned  by  St.  Luke.  The  only  difficulty  is,  that 
St.  Luke  makes  it  subsequent  to  the  healing  of  the  demoniac  and  of  St.  Peter's 
mother-in-law,  while  St.  Mark  places  it  before.  The  order  of  the  latter  is  con- 
firmed by  St.  Matthew,  and  distinctly  to  be  preferred,  especially  as  the  change 
of  order  in  St.  Luke  can  be  partly  accounted  for  by  the  desire  of  the  Evangel- 
ist to  place  in  immediate  contrast  the  reception  in  the  synagogue  at  Cana  with 
the  rejection  a  week  before  at  Nazareth.     See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  285  sq. 

2  From  the  notice  of  the  hired  servants  (Mark  i.  20),  the  two  vessels  employed 
(Luke  v.  7),  and  the  subsequent  mention  of  St.  John's  acquaintance  with  one  in 
so  high  a  position  as  the  high-priest  (John  xviii.  15),  it  has  been  reasonably 
inferred  that  Zebedee,  if  not  a  wealthy  man  (Jerome,  in  Matt.  iv.  12,  opp.  to 
Chrys.  in  Joann.  Horn.  II.  1),  was  at  any  rate  of  some  position  in  Capernaum. 

3  See  especially  Mark  i.  27  ( Tisch.),  in  which  this  amazement  both  at  the  teach- 
ing and  the  miracle  is  expressed  in  the  strongest  terms: — Tf  icrnv  tovto  ;  8(- 
Saxh  kouvii  Kar  Qovaiav  koX  tois  iryev/xaffti'  toIs  aKaSaprois  eirndaffft,  Kal 
inra.Kovov<riv  avraj. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  157 


confession,1  "  Let  us  alone,  —  I  know  thee  who  thou  art; 
the  Holy  One  of  God."     What  amazement 
was  there  then  when  those  frightful  voices       LZe'„':\t. 
were   silenced,    and    the    wretched    sufferer, 
whose  frail  body  had  been  the  tenement  of  those  hellish  oc- 
cupants, though  rent  and  convulsed  by  the  final  paroxysm, 
vet  a  moment  afterwards  stood   both  freed       „  .  I  M 

J  Mark  i.  26. 

and  unharmed  before  them.2     There  were  as       &**  »■■  ■■•■>•■ 

.  _  Luke  vi.  7. 

yet  none  among  those  simple-hearted  men  to 
object  to  healings  on   the   Sabbath.     There  were   as  yet 
none  to  make  the  blasphemous  assertion  that  such  power, 
after  all,  was  only  due  to  some  league  with  the  prince  of 
those  spirits  that  had  been  commanded  with 

■  •         •  ii-ii  i  t.,  ,  Matt.  xi'i.  24. 

such   authority,  and  had   obeyed   with   such       „  ,  ...  _ 

J  '  •>  Mark  in.  32. 

terror.     These  men  of  Capernaum   had   no 
such  doubts  ;  they  saw  and  believed,  yea,  and,  as  two  Evan- 
gelists record,  soon  spread  the  fame  of  the  great  Healer 
not  only  through  all  the  neighboring  villages  and  towns, 
but  in  all  the  regions  round  about  Galilee. 

But  the  wonders  of  this  first  Sabbath  at       mJ^'l  28 :  see 

Meyer. 


Capernaum,  this  day  of  which  the   events      c^uinued perfor- 
mance of  mirucl 

on  the  same  day. 


are  so  specially  and  so  minutely  told  us  by 


two  Evangelists,  had  not  yet  come  to  their 

close.     Immediately  after  that  amazing  scene  in  the  syna- 


1  In  the  circumstances  connected  with  lliis  and  other  miracles  performed  on 
(ii  moniacs,  three  things  are  worthy  of  notice:  (1)  the  lost  consciousness  of  per- 
sonality on  the  part  of  the  Bufferer,  the  man  becoming,  as  it  were,  identified  with, 
and  at  times  the  mouthpiece  of,  the  devil  within  him  (Mark  v.  7,  Luke  viii.  28); 
(2)  the  terror-stricken  recognition  on  the  part  of  the  devils  of  Jesus  as  the  Son 
of  God  and  tluir  future  Judge  (Matt.  viii.  29,  Mark  iii.  11.  v.  7,  Luke  viii.  28), 
enhanced  in  the  present  narrative  by  the  awful  ea\  (Luke  iv.  34)  of  the  recoiling 
demon :  (8)  the  prohibition  from  speaking  on  the  part  of  our  Lord  (Mark  i.  34,  iii. 
12,  Luke  iv.  41),  possibly  that  the  multitude  might  not  believe  in  their  Redeemer 
on  tlie  testimon)  of  devils.  Compare  Cyril  Alex,  on  Luke  iv.  41,  l'art  i.  p.  71 
(Transl.).  Hence,  perhaps,  the  omission  of  the  prohibition  in  the  case  of  the 
demoniacs  ofGadara  or  Gergesa,  when  only  those  were  present  whose  faith 
was  already  tirm  and  convictions  true  and  settled. 

•-  For  further  comments  on  this  miracle,  Bee  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  23o,  and  for 
some  thoughtful  observations  on  the  case  of  demoniacal  possessions  generally, 
Olshausen,  Commentary,  p.305.  Compare  also  Deyling,  Oba.  Sacr.  xxvm.  Part 
ii.  p.  878  'i 

14 


158  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

gogue,  probably  about  mid-day,1  our  Lord,  with  His  four 

freshly-called    disciples   round    Him,    enters 

"''"'  into  the    common    dwelling  of  two  of  the 

Ver.  29.  ~ 

number,  and  graciously  vouchsafes  to  that 
small  home-circle,  on  the  person  of  the  mother-in-law  of 
St.  Peter,  another  merciful  display  of  those  healing  powers, 
of  which  a  whole  synagogue  had  but  lately  been  witness. 
There,  perhaps  in  the  low  and  crowded  suburb,2  the 
mother-in-law  of  the  Apostle  Peter  was  laid,  and  sick,  as 
the  physician-Evangelist  characteristically  notices,  of  a 
great  fever.3  But  the  Healer  was  now  nigh  at  hand.  Anx- 
iously they  tell  Him  of  her  state  ;  anxiously  they  beseech 
His  help ;  and  with  power  and  majesty  that  help  is  be- 
stowed.    With  His  voice  the  Lord  rebukes4 

Lvke  iv.  39. 

Maii.  via.  85.       the  evil  influence  of  the  disease,  with  His  hand 
He  touches  the  sufferer, —  and  she,  who  a  mo- 
ment before  lay  subdued  and  powerless,  now  rises, supported 


1  It  would  seem,  from  a  passage  in  Josephus,  that  on  the  Sabbath-day  the  usual 
hour  for  the  meal  of  which  our  Lord  appears  afterwards  to  have  partaken  in 
the  house  of  the  two  brothers  was  mid-day :  eVrTj  &pa  ko&  %v  to?s  <rd.filia.iTiv 
o.piaToiroiuabai  uo/xi/xoy  £<tt\v  yi/mu.  De  Vita  Sua,  cap.  54.  The  service  in  the 
synagogue,  the  forms  and  hours  of  which  appear  to  have  been  studiously  con- 
formed to  those  in  the  temple-worship  (Vitringa,  de  Synag.  p.  42,  Jost,  Gesch. 
desJudenth.  Vol.  i.  p.  170),  would  in  all  probability  have  commenced  about 
nine  o'clock,  and  ended  some  time  before  mid-day. 

2  The  conjecture  of  Dr.  Thomson  above  alluded  to  (p.  155,  note  1),  that  Tabiga 
is  the  site  of  what  was  the  manufacturing  suburb  of  Capernaum,  derives  some 
support  from  the  above  incident,  there  being  marshy  land  in  the  vicinity  which 
might  account  for  the  "great  lever"  under  which  St.  Peter's  mother-in-law 
was  suffering.  See  The  Land  and  the  Boole,  Vol.  i.  p.  547.  There  may  be  also  a 
slight  hint  at  the  season  of  the  year,  as  we  learn  from  modern  travellers  that  in 
the  East  fevers  prevail  in  spring  and  autumn,  dysentery  in  the  summer.  Comp. 
Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Krankheiten,"  Vol.  i.  p.  673. 

3  This  passage  has  been  often  referred  to  as  illustrating  not  only  the  accuracy, 
but  the  profession  of  St.  Luke.  We  learn  from  the  Greek  medical  writers  that 
there  was  a  recognized  distinction  between  "great"  and  "  small"  fevers.  See 
Galen,  de  Different  Febr.  I.  cited  by  Wetstein  in  loc. 

4  The  exact  expression  in  the  original  should  not  be  overlooked,  iirtrijxi)(jiu 
tw  irvptTw  (Luke  iv.  39),  according  to  which  the  disease,  like  the  boisterous 
wind  and  stirred-up  sea  in  the  miracle  on  the  lake  (Matt.  viii.  27,  Mark  iv.  sq., 
Luke  viii.  24),  is  treated  as  a  hostile  potency.  Deductions  as  to  the  presence  of 
spiritual  agencies  ill  similar  cases  must  be  made  with  caution  ;  but  the  expression 
is  remarkable,  and  has  not  been  left  unnoticed  by  the  early  expositors.  See 
especially  Cyril  Alex,  in  loc.  Tart  I.  p.  69  (Transl.). 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IX   EASTERN   GALILEE.  159 

by  the  Divine  hand,  and,  as  all  the  three  Synoptical  Evan- 
gelists especially  notice,  ministers  unto  them,1  and  with 
wonted  strength  and  health  prepares  for  our  Lord  and  His 
followers  the  Sabbath  mid-day  meal.     And  yet  the  record 
of  that  eventful  day  is  not  concluded.     A  few  hours  later, 
at  sun-set,2  the  whole  city,  with  all  its  sick, 
gathers  at  the  door  of  the  house,  and  ancient         ,"!  ':.'" 
prophecy   again   finds  its  fulfilment   in   that 
exercise  of  Divine  power  that  raised  the  sick  and  healed 
demoniacs,  and   yet    chained   in   silence  the  driven-forlh 
spirits,3  who,  with    the    recognition    of  terror,  both  knew 
Him  and  would   have   proclaimed    Him   as 

-i     ,      •  T  Marti.**. 

man  s  Redeemer  and  their  own  Judge. 

What  an  insight  does  the  account  of  this  day,  so  marked 
by  deeds  of  love   and  mercy,  give  us  into 
the  nature  of  our  Lord's  ministry  in  Galilee  !        ^  nature  of 

......  .  -       our   Lord's    mhtis- 

\\  hat  holy  activities,  what  ceaseless  acts  of     terial labors, a»tn- 

,         ~        ,  .  ,  .  .  n       dicated  by  tliis  one 

mercies !     Such  a  picture  does  it  give  us  of     day. 
their  actual  nature  and  amount,  that  we  may 
well  conceive  that  the  single  day,  with  all  its  quickly  suc- 
ceeding events,  has  been  thus  minutely  portrayed  to  show 
us  what  our  Redeemer's  ministerial  life  really  was,4  and  to 

1  ■•  Not  only  cloth  He  cure  her  from  her  disease,"  says  Theophylact,  "but  also 
infuses  in  her  full  strength  and  power,  enabling  her  to  minister."  —  In  Luc.  iv. 
SB,  p.  884  (Paris,  1681).  Compare  also  Chrysost.  in  loc.  For  some  very  good 
remarks  on  the  manner  in  which  this  miracle  was  performed,  see  Cyril  Alex,  in 
loc.  Pari  i  p.  Tii  sq.  (Transl.).    Compare  also  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  234. 

i!  This  note  of  time,  supplied  both  by  St.  Mark  (i.  32)  and  St.  Luke  (iv.  40), 
Serves  to  mark  that  the  Sabbath  was  over,  after  which  the  sick  and  suffering 
could  legally  he  brought  to  our  Lord.  See  Lightfoot,  Ifor.  Hebr.  Vol.  i.  p.  30G 
(Roterod,  1686).  So  rightly  Theophylact  (in  Marc.  i.  82),  and  the  Scholiast  in 
Cramer,  ( 'ati  n.  Vol.  i.  p.  278. 

y  The  comment  of  Cyril  Alex,  (referred  to  above,  p.  157,  note  1)  seems  correct 
and  pertinent:  "  lie  would  not  permit  the  unclean  demons  to  confess  Him,  for 
it  was  not  fitting  for  them  to  usurp  the  glory  of  the  Apostolic  office,  nor  with 
impure  tongue  to  talk  id'  the  mystery  of  Christ."  —  Part  I.  p.  71  (Transl.).  See 
also  Theophyl.  in  Luc.  iv.  11  (first  interpretation),  who  snbjoins  the  good  practical 
remark, —  ovx  wpaius  alvos  4f  trrSfxaTi  a/j.apTw\ci)i>. 

■i  The  incidents  of  this  first  Sabbath  at  Capernaum  are  well  noticed  by  Ewald 
[Oeech.  Ciiri.-ihis',  p.  254  sq.),  as  showing  what  the  nature  of  our  Lord's  holy 
labors  really  was.  Comp.  Lange,  Lebt  .•/  Jesu,  a.  i.  11,  p.  "»•".'.»  sq,  The  occurrence 
of  so  many  events  on  a  single  day  makes  the  short  duration  of  the  present  min- 
istry in  liaJilee  le.-s  improbable. 


160  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

justify,  if  need  be,  the  noble  hyperbole  of  the  beloved 
Apostle,  that  if  the  things  which  Jesus  did  should  be  writ- 
ten  every  one,  "  the  world  itself  could  not 

John  xxi.  25. 

contain  the  books  that  should  be  written." 
What  a  day  too  had  this  been  for  Capernaum!  What 
manifestations  of  Divine  power  had  been  vouchsafed  to 

them  in  their  syna^oarue  !    what  mercies  had 

Mark  i.  33.  J        °    & 

been  showered  down  upon  them  in  their 
streets !  Could  they,  and  did  they,  remain  insensible  to 
such  displays  of  omnipotence  ?  It  would  have  been  indeed 
impossible ;  and  it  is  not  with  surprise  that  we  find  that 
in  the  dawn1  of  the  following  morning  the  multitudes, 

conducted  as  it  would  seem  by  Peter  and 
Luiar  42  ^e  newly-called  disciples,  tracked   out  the 

great  Healer  to  the  lonely  place  whither 
He  had  withdrawn  to  commune  with  His  Father,  broke  in 
upon  His  very  prayers,  and  strove  to  prevent  His  leaving 

those  whom.  He    had  now  so  preeminently 

Cli.  iv.  42.  .  .  rn 

blessed.  But  it  might  not  be.  That  request 
could  not  be  granted  in  the  exclusive  manner  in  which  it 
had  been  urged.  Though  the  faith  of  these  men  of  Ca- 
pernaum was  subsequently  rewarded  by  our  Lord's  vouch- 
safing soon  to  return  again,  and  by  His  gracious  choice  of 
Capernaum  as  His  principal  place  of  abode,  yet  now,  as 

He  alike  tells  both  them  and  His  disciples, 

JIarki.SS.  . 

He  must  fulfil  His  heavenly  mission  by 
preaching  to  others  as  well  as  unto  them.  The  blessings 
of  the  Gospel  were  to  be  extended  to  the  other  towns  and 
villages  by  those  peopled  shores,2  and  thither,  with  His 

1  We  learn  from  St.  Mark  that  our  Lord  retired  before  day  broke  to  some 
lonely  spot,  apparently  at  no  great  distance  from  Capernaum  (comp.  Stanley, 
Sinai  and  Palestine,  ch.  x.  p.  374),  and  was  there  praying.  See  ch.  i.  32.  From 
the  tenses  used  and  the  special  note  of  time,  ivvvx°-  A-iew  {Lachm.,  Tisch.),  it 
would  seem  that  He  had  heen  there  some  little  time  before  He  was  discovered  by 
St.  Peter  and  those  with  him,  who  appear  to  have  thus  eagerly  followed  our 
Lord  (KaT($ia>£ai>  avrbu)  at  the  instigation  of  the  multitude.  See  Luke  iv.  42, 
and  compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  4.  11,  Part  n.  p.  561. 

2  The  expression  used  by  St.  Mark  (ch.  i.  38)  is  ras  ix°^vas  Koijxoiroktis  (St. 
Luke  adopts  the  more  general  term,  reus  trepats  TrSAeaii'),  which  seems  to  mark 


LfcCT.  IV.       TIIE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  1G1 

small  company  of  followers,  the  Lord  departed,  "healing," 
as  St.  Matthew  tells  ns,  "all  manner  of  sick- 

-     ,.  Luke  iv.  23. 

ness,  and  all  manner  or  disease,  among  the 
people." 

How  long  this  circuit  lasted  we   are  not  specially  in- 
formed, but  as  one  incident  only,  the  healing 
of  the  earnest  and  adoring  leper,1  appears        7Vo''"u''  /'"'["- 

O  I         '         11  turn  oj  Hits  circuit. 

to  belong  to  this  journey,  we  may  perhaps, 
not  without   some   probability,  believe  that   the  present 
circuit  lasted  but  a  few  days,  and  that  the  return  to  Caper- 
naum took  place  on  the  day  before   the  Sab- 

1  J  Mark  ii.  1. 

bath  of  that  week,  —  a  Sabbath  of  which  we 
have  some  special  notices.2 

the  sort  of  "  village-towns"  (compare  Strabo,  Geogr.  xn.  pp.  537,  557)  with 
which  the  whole  adjacent  plain  of  Gennesarcth  was  closely  studded.  Compare 
Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palest,  oh.  x.  p.  370. 

1  It  seems  right  to  speak  guardedly,  as  St.  Matthew  (ch.  viii.  1)  here  appears 
to  add  a  note  of  time,  Kara^dwri  Se  aiirtp  airb  tov  opovs  (Hec,  Tisch.).  As, 
however,  there  is  nothing  very  definitely  connective  in  the  Ka\  ISov  Aeirpbs  irpo- 
<r«Adu>j'  k.  t.  A.,  as  St.  Mark  and  .St.  Luke  both  agree  in  their  position  of  the 
miracle,  and  as  the  place  it  occupies  in  St.  Matthews  Gospel  can  be  reasona- 
bly accounted  for  (see  Lightfoot,  Harmony,  Vol.  i.  p.  512),  we  seem  justified  ia 
adhering  to  the  order  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke.  Compare  Wieseler,  Clinm. 
Synops.  ]'■  806  sq.  Ou  the  miracle  itself,  one  of  the  most  remarkable  character- 
istics <>f  which  was,  that,  as  the  three  Evangelists  all  specify  (Matt.  viii.  13.  Mark 
i.  41,  Luke  v.  13),  our  Lord  touched  the  sufferer  (SeiKi/vs  on  ?';  071a  avrov  aap| 
a.yia.afxov  fxereSiSov,  Theoph.  in  Matt.  I.e.),  see  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  210;  and 
for  some  good  notices  011  the  nature  of  the  disease,  Von  Amnion,  Leben  Jesu, 
Vol.  i.  p.  111.  and  the  frightful  account  in  Thomson,  Land  and  Bonk,  Vol.  ii. 
p.  516.  The  subject  is  treated  very  fully  and  completely  in  Winer,  It  WIS.  Art. 
'•  Aussatx,"  Vol.  i.  p.  Ill  sq. 

I  As  the  circuit  was  probably  confined  to  the  u  village-towns"  on  the  western 
shores  of  the  lake  and  in  the  vicinity  of  Capernaum  (see  above,  p.  160,  note  2),  we 
have  an  additional  reason  tor  thinking  that  it  did  not  last  more  than  four  or  five 
days,  and  that  thus  our  Lord  might  easily  and  naturally  be  found  at  Capernaum 
on  the  following  Sabbath,  which,  as  we  shall  see  below,  has  a  definite  and  dis- 
tinctive date.  No  objection  against  this  chronological  arrangement  can  be 
founded  on  the  fact  that  our  Lord  "  preached  in  their  synagogues  "  (Mark  i  89, 
Luke  iv.  -11),  as  it  appears  certain,  setting  aside  extraordinary  days  (of  which 
there  would  Beam  to  have  been  one  in  this  very  week,  —  the  Xew  Moon  of  Nisau), 
there  were  Bervioes  <>n  the  Mondays  and  Thursdays  (compare  Mishna,  Tract 
"  Slegillah,"  I.  2),  in  which  the  law  was  read  and  probably  expounded,  and  to 
which  the  Talmudists  (on  "  Baba,  Bathra,"  4)  assigned  as  great  an  antiquity  ::s 
the  days  of  Ezra.  See  Lightfoot,  Harmony,  Vol.  i.  p.  476  (Roterod.  1686),  Vit- 
ringa,  </<■  Synag.  i.  2.  2,  p.  2*7.  and  compare  Jost,  Geseh,  d,  a  Judt  "Hi-  Vol.  i-  p. 
168  s<|.  Some  valuable  observations  on  the  subject  of  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles 
preaching  in  synagogues  will  be  found  in  Vitringa,  de  Synag.  in.  1.  7,  p.  U'JGscj. 

14* 


162  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

Meanwhile  Capernaum  had  not  forgotten  its  Healer  and 
Redeemer,  though  evil  men  from  other  parts 

The  return  to  Ca-  />   /-^i     i-i  i  •*_     •  •        •  r-  .1  nil 

pernaum,  and  heal-     of  trainee,  and,  as  it  is  significantly-  added, 
IZaUt faMM    of  Judaea  and  Jerusalem,  had  now  come  in 
Luke    it  among    them,1  —  men,    as    it   would    seem, 

specially  sent  to  collect  charges  against  our 
Lord,  and  to  mature  the  savage  counsels  which,  we  have 
already  seen,2  had  been  taken  by  the  party  of  the  Sanhe- 
drim No  sooner  was  it  noised  abroad  that  He  had 
returned,  than  we  find  the  whole  city  flocking  to  the 
house,  so  that,  as  St.  Mark  with  one  of  his  graphic  notices 
tells  us,  "there  was  no  room  to  receive  them, 
no  not  so  much  as  about  the  door."  But 
there  were  some  without  who  would  not  be  sent  away. 
One  sinful3  but  heart-touched  paralytic  there  was,  whose 
body  and  soul  alike  needed  healing,  and  whose  faith  was 
such  that,  when  entry  in  the  usual  way  was  found  to  be 


1  We  owe  the  important  notice  of  the  precise  quarter  from  which  these  evil 
men  came  solely  to  St.  Luke.  From  the  other  two  Synoptical  Evangelists  we 
only  learn  that  the  objectors  were  Scribes  (Matt.  ix.  3,  Mark  ii.  6),  and  that  they 
appear  to  have  come  there  with  a  sinister  intent.  The  allusion,  however,  to 
Juda?a  and  Jerusalem  (especially  when  compared  with  Mark  iii.  22,  ypaj.i-iJ.aT  els 
01  airb  'lepoaoXv/xcov  KarafidvTes),  throws  a  light  upon  the  whole,  and  gives 
some  plausibility  to  the  supposition  that  the  "  Scribes  and  Tharisees  "  we  here 
meet  with  for  the  first  time  in  Galilee  were  emissaries  from  the  hostile  party  at 
Jerusalem.  These  men,  promptly  uniting  themselves  with  others  that  they 
found  to  be  like-minded  in  Galilee,  form  a  settled  plan  of  collecting  charges 
against  our  Lord,  and  the  sequel  shows  with  what  feelings  and  in  what  spirit 
they  were  acting.  For  a  while  they  wear  the  mask;  they  reason  (Luke  v.  21), 
they  murmur  (ver.  30),  they  insidiously  watch  (ch.  vi.  7).  Soon,  however,  all 
disguise  is  thrown  aside;  a  deed  of  mercy  on  the  Sabbath,  in  spite  of  their  tacit 
protest,  hurries  them  on  to  their  ruthless  decision.  That  decision  is  at  Caper- 
naum what  it  had  already  been  at  Jerusalem  (John  v.  18),  —  death.  See  Matt, 
xii.  14,  Mark  iii.  6. 

2  See  above,  Lect.  in.  p.  138. 

3  We  may  infer  this  from  the  declaration  of  our  Lord  recorded  by  all  the 
three  Synoptical  Evangelists, —  aipeoivrai  <rov  at  a/xapriat,  Matt.  ix.  2,  Mark  ii. 
6;  comp.  Luke  v.  20.  The  disease  of  the  man,  as  Neander  observes,  may  have 
been  due  to  sinful  excesses;  and  the  consciousness,  if  not  of  this  connection,  yet 
of  the  guilt  within  him,  was  such  that  spirit  and  body  reacted  on  each  other,  and 
an  assurance  of  forgiveness  was  first  needed,  before  the  sensible  pledge  of  it 
extended  to  him  by  his  cure  could  be  fully  and  properly  appreciated.  See  Life 
of  Christy  p.  272  (Bohn),  and  compare  Olshausen,  Commentary,  Vol.  i.  p.  300  sq. 
(Clark). 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  1G3 

impracticable,  he  prevailed  on  friends  to  bear  him  up  the 
outside  staircase,  and  let  him  down  through  the  roof  into 
the  upper  chamber,  where,  as  it  would  seem  from  the  nar- 
rative, our  Lord  was  preaching  to  the  mingled  multitude 
both  around  Him  and  in  the  courtyard  below.1  And  we 
remember  well  how  that  faith  prevailed,  and 
how  the  soul  was  healed  first  and  then  the  ■     ' 

I  cr.  24 

palsied  body,  and  how  the  last  act  was  made 
use  of,  as  it  were,  to  justify  the  first  in  the  eyes  of  those 
Scribes  and  Pharisees  who  had  stolen  in  among  the  simple- 
hearted  men  of  Capernaum,  and  were  finding  blasphemy 
in  the  exercise  of  the  Divine  power  and  prerogatives  of 
the  Son  of  God.  But  this  time  at  least  those  intruders 
were  silenced,  for  when  the  sufferer  obeyed  His  Lord's 
command,  and  showed  the  completeness  of  his  restored 
powers2  by  bearing  his  bed  and  walking  through  that  now 
yielding  throng,  not  only  amazement,  but,  as 

J  s  °'  J  '  Ch.  ix.  2.    (See 

St.  Matthew  and  St.  Luke  both  notice,  fear     z&cft-J 
found  its  way  into  their  hearts,  and  made  the 
lips  confess  "that  they  had  seen  strange  things  that  day." 
But   another   opportunity   soon  offered  itself  to  these 


1  The  course  adopted  was  as  follows:  As  the  bearers  could  not  enter  the  house, 
on  account  of  the  press  (Mark  ii.  4).  they  ascend  by  the  outside  staircase  that  led 
from  the  Btreei  to  the  root'  (Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Dach,"  Vol.  i.  ]>.  242),  proceed- 
ing thereon  till  they  come  to  the  Bpol  over  which  they  judged  our  Lord  to  be. 
They  then  remove  the  tiles,  or  thin  .--tone  slabs,  which  are  sometimes  used  even 
at  this  day  (see  Thomson,  cited  below),  and  make  an  opening  (Mark  ii.  4.  Luke 
\  19;  comp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  16.  12),  through  which,  perhaps  assisted  by 
those  bs!ow,  they  let  the  man  down  into  the  uTrep'x'ov,  or  large  and  commonly 
/"»•  chamber  beneath,  in  which,  or  perhaps  lather  under  the  verandah  of  which, 
the  Lord  then  was.  See  Thomson,  The  Land  and  Hie  Book,  Vol.  ii.  i>.  7  s(|., 
Meyer,  Komment.  tiber  Murk.  p.  24  Bq.,  and  compare  the  good  article  in  Kitto, 
Hill.  Ci/r/nj)    Vol.  i.  p.  S74  sip,  especially  p.  877. 

-  ••  lie  saith  to  the  paralytic,  Rise,  and  take  up  thy  bed,  to  add  a  greater  con- 
firmation to  the  miracle,  as  ool  being  in  appearance  only ;  and,  at  the  same  time, 
to  Bhow  that  II"  aot  only  healed  him,  but  infused  power  into  him." — Theophyl. 
i>n  Mark  ii.  11.  The  command  on  the  former  occasion  that  it  was  given  (John 
r.8)  probably  also  involved  a  reference  to  Christ's  lordship  over  the  Sabbath. 
Comp.  Lect.  in.  p.  137.  For  further  comments  on  this  miracle,  Bee  Olshausen, 
Commentary,  Vol.  i.  p.  321;  sq.,  Lange,  Leben  Jem,  11.  4.  14,  fart  11.  p.  666  »■,., 
Trench,  Notes  on  tin-  Miracles,  p.  199  sq.;  and  for  some  curious  allegorical  appli- 
cations, Theophylact,  loc.cit.  p.  l'JO  (Paris,  1631). 


164  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

captious  and  malignant  emissaries.     Every  prejudice  was 

to    be   rudely  shocked,   when,  as   it   would 

The  can  of  si.     seem,  on  t]ie  very  same  day,  our  Lord  called 

Matthew,   and    the  '  ^  •  ' 

feast  at  his  house.       from  his  very  toll-booth,  by  the  side  of  the 
jfari&ii  lake,  a  publican,  Matthew,1  —  a  publican,  to 

be  one  of  His  followers  and  disciples.  Here 
was  an  infraction  of  all  that  Pharisaical  prejudice  held  to 
be  most  clear  and  recognized,  an  infraction,  too,  against 
which  they  were  soon  able  to  inveigh  openly,  when,  at  the 
feast  which  the  grateful  publican  made  in  honor  of  His 
Lord,  and  to  which,  perhaps  by  way  of  farewell,  many  of 
his  old  associates  were  summoned,2  the  great  Teacher 
openly  sat  down  to  meat  "  with  publicans  and  sinners." 
This  was  an  opportunity  that  could  not  be  neglected. 
The  disciples  are  taxed  with  their  own  and  their  Master's 


1  There  seems  no  reason  for  calling  in  question  the  opinion  of  most  of  the 
more  ancient  writers  (see  Const.  Jpost.  vm.  22,  and  Coteler,  in  he. ;  contrast, 
however,  Heracleon,  ap.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  iv  11),  that  Levi  (Mark  ii.  14,  Luke 
v.  27)  and  Matthew  (Matt.  ix.  9)  are  names  of  one  and  the  same  person.  In 
favor  of  this  identity,  we  have  (1)  the  perfect  agreement,  both  as  to  place  and  all 
attendant  circumstances,  of  the  narrative  of  the  calling  of  Matthew  (Matt.  ix. 
10)  with  that  of  the  calling  of  Levi  (Mark  ii.  15,  Luke  v.  29);  (2)  the  absence  on 
the  lists  of  the  Apostles  of  any  trace  of  the  name  Levi  (the  attempted  identifica- 
tion  with  Lebba?us  is  in  the  highest  degree  improbable),  while  the  name  of  Mat- 
thew occurs  in  all,  and  is  specified  by  the  first  Evangelist  (ch.  x.  3)  as  of  that 
earthly  calling  which  is  here  definitely  ascribed  by  the  second  Evangelist  to 
Levi.  It  is  far  from  improbable  that,  after  and  in  memory  of  his  call,  the  grate- 
ful publican  changed  his  name  to  one  more  appropriate  and  significant.  He 
wras  now  no  longer  ,,'l?  but  n»JiB,  not  Levi  but  Theodore,  one  who  might  well 
deem  both  himself  and  all  his  future  life  a  veritable  "  gift  of  God."  See  Winer, 
RWB.  s.  v.  "Name,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  135. 

2  This  supposition,  which  is  due  to  Neander  (Life  of  Christ,  p.  230,  Bohn),  is 
not  without  some  probability;  at  the  same  time  the  specially  inserted  dative 
avTiZ  (Luke  v.  29)  seems  clearly  to  imply  that  St.  Matthew's  first  object  in  giving 
the  entertainment  was  to  do  honor  to  our  Lord,  and  thereby  to  commemorate 
his  own  now  highly-favored  lot.  Compare  Hall,  Contempt,  iv.  4.  The  attempt 
to  show  that  the  feast  mentioned  by  St.  Matthew  is  not  that  mentioned  by  St. 
Mark  and  St.  Luke  (Greswell,  Dissert,  xxv.  Vol.  ii.  p.  397)  is  by  no  means  suc- 
cessful;  still  less  the  attempt  of  Meyer  (/Comment,  rib.  Matt.  p.  195)  to  establish  a 
discrepancy  between  the  first  and  the  other  two  Synoptical  Evangelists  as  to  the 
locality  of  the  feast.  That  iv  ttj  oiKia  (Matt.  ix.  10)  refers  to  the  house  of  St. 
Matthew  (iv  ttj  oIklo.  ttj  iKeivov,  Chrys.)  is  not  only  grammatically  possible, 
but  in  a  high  degree  natural  and  probable;  the  general  expression  is  studiedly 
used  by  the  Apostle  as  keeping  in  the  background  the  fact  of  his  own  grateful 
hospitality.    See  Blunt,  Veracity  of  Evangelists,  $  5,  p.  30  sq. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  165 

laxity,  to  which  the  Lord  vouchsafes  an  answer,  turning 
against  these  gainsayers  the  very  term  in  which  their  pre- 
judice had  expressed  itself.  The  Redeemer,  He  tells  them, 
had  "  not  come  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sin- 

„       T.     ,  ...  JKatt.tr.  18. 

ners  to   repentance.       It  the  publicans  were 

sinners,  then  to  them  must  He   vouchsafe  His  presence, 

then  with  them  was  it  meet  that  He  should  be  found.     It 

was  in  vain   that  they  shifted  their  ground,  and  brought 

forward  the  stern  practices  of  John's  disciples,  some  of 

whom  it  is  noticed  were  present,  and  some  of 

whom  seem  to  have  been   speakers.      They         „"r  "' 

1  *>  Halt,  ix.  14. 

were  not  worldly,  they  fasted ;  the  prophet 
of  Nazareth  feasted.  Yea,  but  the  very  garments  worn 
by  those  around,  and  the  very  wine  they  were  drinking, 
suggested  a  simile  that  conveyed  the  true  answer,  — 
the  New  and  the  Old  could  not  be  brought  together;1 
the  spirit  of  the  new  dispensation  was  incompatible  with 
the  dead  formalities  of  a  dispensation  that  now,  with  all 
that  marked  it,  was  gone  and  passed  away  for  ever. 

The  day  that  followed  was  apparently  a  Sabbath,"  the 
second-first  Sabbath  as  it  is  especially  defined 

_     (  Further  charges: 

by  St.  Luke,  —  the  first  Sabbath,  as  it  is  now     thepiueiang  of  the 

most  plausibly  explained,  of  a  year  that  stood 

second  in  a  sabbatical  cycle,3  —  when  again  the. same  bit- 


1  Some  good  comments  on  this  text,  of  which  the  above  is  a  summary,  will  be 
found  in  Cyril  Alex.  Cm, mi,  ,it.  on  St.  Luke,  Part  II.  p.  89  (Oxf.  1859). 

-  This  assertion  rests,  not  on  the  if  iKfifco  t<£  Kaipy  (eh.  xii.  1)  of  St.  Mat- 
thew ,  which  is  only  a  general  note  of  time,  but  on  the  apparent  close  connection 
in  point  of  time  between  the  different  charges  of  the  Pharisees  and  their  adher- 
ents.   The  Passover  was  nigh  at  hand,  and  time  was  pressing. 

•"  There  are  four  explanations  of  this  difficult  word  that  deserve  consideration: 
('0  that  of  Theophylacl  [in  loc.),  that  it  was  a  Sabbath  that  immediately  suc- 
ceeded a  festn  al,  which,  from  falling  on  the  irapaoKeuri,  was  observed  as  a  regu- 
lar Sabbath;  (h)  that  of  Scaliger  [de  Emend.  Temp.  p.  557),  that  it  was  the  Sabbath 
that  succeeded  the  second  day  of  the  Passover,"  (c)  that  of  Hitzig  (Ost.  it.  Pjingst, 
p.  19),  that  it  was  the  fifteenth  of  Nisan,  the  fourteenth  being,  it  is  asserted, 
always  coincident  with  a  Sabbath;  (d)  that  of  Wieseler  [Chron.  Synops.  p.  231 
sip),  as  stated  in  the  text.    Of  these  (a)  is  open  to  the  decisive  objection  that 

such  concurrences   niu.-t    have   been    frequent,  and  that  if  such  was  the  custom, 

and  such  the  designation,  we  must  have  found  some  trace  of  it  elsewhere;  (<■) 
involves  an  assumption  not   historically  demonstrable   (see   Wieseler,  Chron, 


166  THE   MINISTRY  IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

ter  spirit  of  Pharisaical  malice  finds  opportunity  for  dis- 
playing itself.     Yesterday  the  social  privacy  of  the  publi- 
can's feast,  to-day  the  peace  and  rest  of  the  year's  first 
Sabbath,1  is  broken  in  upon  by  the  malignity  of  that  same 
gathered  company  of  Pharisees  whom  Judaea  and  Jeru- 
salem, and  alas  too  Galilee,  had  sent  forth  to 
Deut.xJiii.25-.see     forejudge  and  to  condemn.     With  the  full 
Wxhna    n-eait,"     sancti0n  of  the  Mosaic  law  the  disciples  were 
plucking  the  ears  of  ripening  corn,  and  rub- 
bing them  in  their  hands.     The   act  was  permissible,  but 
the  day  was  holy,2  and  the  charge,  partly  in  the  way  of 
rebuke  to  the  disciples,  partly  in  the  way  of  complaint  to 
our  Lord,  who  was  tacitly  sanctioning  their  act,  is  promptly 
made  with  every  assumption  of  offended  piety,  —  "  Why 
do  ye  do  that  which  it  is  not  lawful  to  do  on 
the    Sabbath?"    Why  indeed !     The    reason 
was  obvious;    the  justification   immediate.     Did  not  the 
history  of  the  man  after  God's  own  heart  justify  such  an 

Synops.  p.  353  sq.),  and,  equally  with  (b),  labors  under  the  formidable  objection 
that  as  the  event  here  specified  is  thus  at,  and  not,  as  every  reasonable  system  of 
chronology  appears  to  suggest,  before  a  Passover,  the  Passover  at  the  feeding  of 
the  five  thousand  (John  vi.  4)  must  be  referred  to  a  succeeding  year,  and  an 
interval  of  more  than  a  year  assumed  to  exist  between  the  fifth  and  sixth  chap- 
ters of  St.  John.  We  adopt,  then,  ((f),  as  open  to  no  serious  objections,  as  involv- 
ing no  chronological  difficulties,  and  as  apparently  having  some  slight  historical 
basis  to  rest  upon,  viz.  that  at  this  period  years  appear  to  have  been  reckoned  by 
their  place  in  a  Sabbatical  cycle.  Comp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  10.  6.  The  word  is 
omitted  in  the  important  MSS.  B  and  L,  and  a  few  ancient  versions  (see  Tischen- 
dorf  in  loc.),  but  seems  certainly  genuine,  there  being  an  obvious  reason  for  its 
omission,  and  none  for  its  insertion. 

1  The  exact  date  of  this  Sabbath,  according  to  our  present  calendar,  if  we  can 
rely  on  the  tables  of  Wurm  and  Wieseler,  would  seem  to  be  April  9,  —  a  date 
when  the  corn  would  be  forward  enough  in  many  localities  to  be  rubbed  in  the 
hands.  See  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  p.  225  sq.,  and  compare  Lect.  in.  p.  107, 
note  3. 

2  The  act  was  regarded  as  a  kind  of  petty  harvesting,  and  as  such  was  regarded 
by  the  ceremonial  Pharisee  as  forbidden,  if  not  by  the  written,  yet  by  the  oral 
law:  "Metens  sabbato  vel  tantillum  reus  est.  Et  vellere  spicas  est  species  mes- 
sionis."  Maimonides,  Tit.  "  Shabbath,"  ch.  ix.  cited  by  Lightfoot  (Hor.  Hebr.  in 
Matt.  xii.  2,  Vol.  ii.  p.  320),  who  further  reminds  us  that,  according  to  the  tradi- 
tional law,  the  punishment  for  the  offence  was  capital,  the  action  being  one  of 
those  "per  qua;  reus  lit  homo  lapidationis  atque  exeisionis." — Maiinon.  ib.  ch. 
vii.  It  is  not  probable  that  at  this  period  such  a  penalty  would  ever  have  been 
pressed  ;  still  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  legally  grave  nature  of  the 


Lect.  IV.     THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  167 

act?     Did  not  the  unblamed  acts  of  the  great  type  of  Him 

who  stood  before  them  supply  the  substance, 

as  did  ancient  prophecy  the  exact  terms  of  am-a=r'- 

11  ^  Ilos.  vi.  6. 

the  answer  that  was  vouchsafed,  "I  will  have 

mercy,  and  not  sacrifice"?     Mercy,  and  not  sacrifice, — 

words  uttered  already   the   day  before,  but 

.  ...  -,        ,  .  Untl.  ix.  13. 

now  accompanied  with  a  striking  declaration, 
which  some  of  those  standing  by  might  have  remembered 
had  been  practically  illustrated  three  weeks  before  in  Je- 
rusalem by  a  deed  of  mercy  and  power,1  even  "that  the 
Son   of  man  is  Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath," 
and  oi  all  its  alleged  restrictions. 

And  now  hostility  deepens.     On  the  next,  or  apparently 
next  day  but  one,2  which,  in  the  case  of  the 

•  i       •  /  r*r\c\\  The  healing  of  a 

year  we  are  considering  (a.  u.  c.  /82),  com-  mnn  u.ith  „  dis- 
putation would  seem  to  fix  as  the  seventh  ^J£"d  °"  * 
day  of  the  first  month,  and  which  we  may  infer 
from  a  passage  in  Ezekiel  was  specially  regarded  as  a  holy 
day,"  we  almost  detect  traces  of  a  regular  stratagem.  A 
man  in  the  synagogue  afflicted  with  a  with- 

,      .     ,       ,  ,       ,  ,  ,  .  .  Luke  vi.  6. 

ered  right  band, placed  perchance  in  a  promi- 
nent position,  forms  the  subject  of  a  question  which  these 
wretched  spies   not  only  entertain  in   their 

.  ,  ,  Luke  vi.  7,8. 

hearts,  but  even  presume  openly  to  propound  „ 

to   our  Lord,  —  '"was   it    lawful    to   heal   on 

the   Sabbath-day?"     The  answer  was  prompt  and  practi- 


supposed  offence  may  hare  tended  to  call  forth  from  our  Lord  that  full  ami 
explicit  vindication  of  His  disciples  which  the  Evangelists  have  recorded. 

1  Sec  Lect.  III.  p.  137. 

2  See  below,  p.  182,  note  1,  from  which  it  would  seem  that  there  is  an  error  of 
a  day  in  the  tables  of  Wurm  and  Wieseler. 

8  After  speaking  of  the  first  month,  and  the  sacrifices  to  be  observed  therein, 
tin'  prophet  adds  [eh.  xlv.  20):  "And  so  thou  shall  do  the  seventh  day  <>f  the 
month  for  every  one  that  erreth,  and  for  him  thai  is  Bimple:  so  shall  ye  reconcile 
the  house."  From  these  words,  when  coupled  with  the  similar  notice  of  the 
Solemn  first  day  of  Nisan  in  the  verses  that  precede,  and  the  notice  of  the  still 
more  solemn  fourteenth  day  In  the  verses  that  follow,  it  has  been  apparently 
rightly  inferred  thai  the  seventh  of  Nisan  was  regarded  as  holy,  and  might 
appropriately  i>e  designated  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  vi.  6)  as  irtpov  o-aji!ia.Tov.  Comp. 
Wieseler,  Cliron.  Synops.  p,  'J:;,. 


1G8  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

cal :   first  the   command   to   the   sufferer  to   rise  from  his 
place    and    stand   forth    in    the    midst;    then    the    all-em- 
bracing gaze 1  of  grief  and  anger,  and,  lastly, 
after  a  few  reproving  words,  the  immediate 

Mark  iti.  5.  . 

performance  of  the  miracle.2  But  such  an 
answer  malice  and  infidelity  could  neither  receive  nor  en- 
dure. The  flame  of  savage  vengeance  at  once  breaks  out. 
"They   were    filled   with    madness"    are    the    remarkable 

words  of  St.  Luke  ;  they  go  forth  from  the 

Ch.  vl.  11.  '  J    & 

juatt.xii.ii.        synagogue,  they  hold   a  hasty  council,  yea, 

they  join  with  their  very  political  opponents, 

the  followers  of  Herod   Antipas,3  as  St.  Mark  has  been 

moved  to  record,  and  now  deliberately  lay  plans  to  slay 

the  great  Healer.     The  cup,  in  their  eyes,  is 

full.      Two   days    since    blasphemy,   as  they 

deemed   it,  had   been  spoken  ;  this,  however,  they  might 

have  borne  with  ;  but  publicans  have  been  received,  the 

1  Not  only  St.  Mark,  but  St.  Luke  notices  this  act  of  our  Lord's,  both  using  the 
same  expressive  word,  irepij3\eif/d/xti'os.  On  the  use  of  this  term  by  St.  Mark, 
comp.  p.  3:),  note  1. 

2  The  present  miracle  forms  one  of  the  seven  which  are  particularly  noticed  as 
having  been  performed  on  the  Sabbath  (see  John  v.  9,  Mark  i.  21,  Mark  i.  29, 
John  ix.  14,  Luke  xiii.  14,  Luke  xiv.  1,  and  comp.  Crit.  Sacr.  Thesaur.  Nov.  Vol. 
ii.  j).  196),  and  is  specially  the  one  before  the  performance  of  which  the  Lord 
vouchsafes  to  vindicate  the  lawfulness  (Matt.  xii.  12)  of  such  acts  of  mercy,  by 
an  appeal  to  recognized  principles  of  justice  and  mercy  which  even  the  Pharisees 
could  not  reject  or  deny.  For  some  comments  on  the  miracle,  the  nature  of 
which  was  the  immediate  restoration  of  the  nutritive  powers  of  nature  to  a  part 
where  they  had  perhaps  by  degrees  but  now  permanently  ceased  to  act  (Winer, 
IiWJS.  Art.  " Krankheiten,"  Vol.  i.  p.  674),  compare  Hook,  Serm.  on  the  Mira- 
cles, Vol.  i.  p.  135  sq.,  and  especially  see  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  312  sq. 

■T  There  seems  to  be  no  reason  to  dissent  from  the  conjecturally  expressed 
opinion  of  Origen  [Comm.  in  Matt.  Tom.  xvn.  26)  that  the  Herodians  were  a 
political  sect  who,  as  their  name  implies,  were  partisans  of  Herod  Antipas  {ol  to 
'H/xliSou  (ppovovvres,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  15.  10),  and,  by  consequence,  of  the 
Roman  government,  so  far  as  it  tended  to  maintain  his  influence.  Compare 
Ewald,  Gesch.  Christw'  (Vol.  v.),  p.  43  sq.  Thus  they  were  really,  as  Meyer 
(Komment.  ub.  Matt.  xxii.  16)  defines  them,  royalists  as  opposed  to  maintainers 
of  theocratic  principles;  still,  being  members  of  a  political  and  not  a  religious 
sect,  the}  might  easily  be  found  in  coalitions  with  one  of  the  latter  sects  for  tem- 
po: an  objects  which  might  affect,  or  be  thought  to  affect,  the  interests  of  both. 
Comp.  Matt.  xxii.  16,  Mark  xii.  13,  where  tiny  again  appear  in  temporary  union 
with  the  Pharisees.  For  further  comments,  see  Winer,  RWB.  s.  v.  Vol.  i.  p.  486, 
Herzog,  Real-Encycl.  s.  v.  Vol.  vii.  p.  14,  and  compare  Lightfoot,  Barm.  Evany. 
j  13,  Vol.  i.  p.  470. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  169 

rest  of  a  weekly  Sabbath  infringed  upon,  and  now,  worst  of 
all,  a  legal  Sabbath  has  been  profaned  by  —  beneficence; 
that  profanity  must  be  washed  out  by  blood.  As  but  a  short 
time  before  in  Jerusalem,  so  now  in  Galilee  the  fearful 
determination  is  distinctly  formed  of  compassing  the  death 
of  One  whose  life-giving  words  their  own  ears  had  heard, 
and  whose  deeds  of  mercy  their  own  eyes  had  been  per- 
mitted to  behold. 

This  is  a  very  important  turning-point  in  the  Gospel- 
history,  and  it  prepares  us  for  the  event 
which  followed,  perhaps  only  a  day  or  two  twttve  Apode$, 
afterwards,1  —  and  which  now  the  deepening  X'J™  "  *" 
animosities  against  the  sacred  person  of  our 
Redeemer  rendered  in  a  high  degree  natural  and  appropri- 
ate, —  a  retirement  into  the  lonely  hills  on  the  western 
side  of  the  lake,  and  the  choice  of  twelve  pillars  for  the 
not  yet  consolidated,  yet  already  endangered  Church. 
There,  on  that  horned  hill  of  Hattin,  which  a  late  tradi- 
tion does  not  in  this  case*  appear  to  have  erroneously 
selected,2  was  the  scene  of  the  formal  compacting  and 
framing  together  of  the  spiritual  temple  of  God ;  there 
too  was  heard  that  heavenly  summary  of  the  life  and  prac- 
tice of  Christianity  which  age  after  age  has  regarded  as 
the  most  sacred  heritage  that  God  has  vouchsafed  unto 
His  Church.' 


1  Tlie  only  note  of  time  is  £v  reus  ^ue'pais  ravrais  (Luke  vi.  12),  which,  though 
far  too  general  to  be  quoted  in  support  of  the  above  supposition,  does  not  in  any 
way  seem  opposed  to  it.  There  appears  much  in  favor  of  a  close  connection  in 
point  of  time  between  the  formal  choice  of  the  Apostles  and  these  murderous 
determinations  of  the  hierarchical  party  and  their  adherents.  Compare  Ewald, 
GeSCh.  Christ  us'  (Vol.  v.)  p.  270  Bq. 

2  See  Robinson,  Pal  ■tin,  ,  Vol.  ii.  p.  3T0  sq.  (ed.  2),  who  admits  that,  though 
this  appears  to  be  only  a  late  tradition  of  the  Latin  Church,  "there  is  nothing 
in  the  form  or  circumstances  of  the  hill  itself  to  contradict  the  supposition.''  So 
far,  indeed,  it  may  be  added,  is  this  from  being  the  case,  that  Dr.  Stanley  finds 
the  conformation  of  the  hill  so  strikingly  in  accordance  with  what  we  read  in 
the  Gospel  narrative,  "  as  almost  to  force  the  inference  that  in  this  instance  the 
eye  of  those  who  selected  the  spot  was  for  once  rightly  gnided." —  Sinai  and 
Palestine,  p.  881  (ed.  2).  Thomson  (  The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  118)  speaks 
far  more  slightingly  than  is  usual  with  that  agreeable  and  observant  writer. 

3>Of  the  many  expository  works  on  this  divine  discourse  the  following  may  be 

15 


170  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE         t.kct.  IV. 

I  must  here  be  tempted  into  no  digressions,  for  there 
are  several  events  yet  before  us  for  considera- 

Probable  form  of         _  • 

the  sermon  on  the  tion ;  still,  at  such  an  important  point  in 
our  history,  it  does  seem  almost  wrong  to 
suppress  the  humble  statement  of  an  opinion  on  a  most 
serious  and  yet  most  contested  question  in  reference  to  this 
divine  discourse.  Let  me  say,  then,  with  that  brevity  that 
our  limits  demand,  —  First,  that  there  seem  greatly  pre- 
ponderant reasons  for  believing  the  sermon  recorded  by  St. 
Luke  to  be  substantially  the  same  with  that  recited  by  St. 
Matthew;1  Secondly,  that  the  divine  unity  which  per- 
vades the  whole  totally  precludes  our  believing  that  St. 
Matthew  is  here  presenting  us  only  with  a  general  collec- 
tion of  discourses,  uttered  at  different  times,  and  leads  us 
distinctly  to  maintain  the  more  natural  and  reasonable 
opinion,  that  this  holy  and  blessed  Sermon  was  uttered  as 
it  is  here  delivered  to  us2;   Thirdly,  that   of  the  modes 


selected  as  appearing,  perhaps  more  particularly,  to  deserve  the  attention  of  the 
student:  the  exposition  of  Chrysostom  in  his  Commentary  on  St.  Matthew; 
Augustine,  de  Sermone  Domini,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1229  sq.  (Migne),  and  with  it  Trench, 
Serm.on  the  Mount  (ed.  2);  Pott,  de  Indole  Orat.  Mont.  (Helmst.  1788),  whose 
general  conclusion,  however,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  Sermon,  does  not  appear 
plausible;  the  exegetical  comments  of  Stier  (Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  i.  p.  90, 
Clark)  and  Maldonatus  (Comment,  p.  95);  the  special  work  of  Tholuck,  Berg- 
predigt  (translated  in  Edinb.  Cabinet  Libr.);  and,  lastly,  the  more  directly 
practical  comments  and  discourses  of  Bp.  r.lackr.ll  (Lond.  1717)  and  James  Blair 
(Lond.  1740,  with  a  commendatory  preface  by  Waterland);  to  which  may  be 
added  the  comments  in  Taylor,  Life  of  Christ,  n.  12,  Vol.  i.  p.  190  (Lond.  1836), 
and  in  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  4. 12,  Part  n.  p.  566  sq. 

1  The  main  arguments  are,  —  that  the  beginning  and  end  of  the  Sermon  are 
nearly  identical  in  both  Gospels;  that  the  precepts,  as  recited  by  St.  Luke,  are 
in  the  same  general  order  as  those  in  St.  Matthew,  and  that  they  are  often 
expressed  in  nearly  the  same  words;  and,  lastly,  that  each  Evangelist  specifies 
the  same  miracle,  viz.  the  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant,  as  having  taken 
place  shortly  after  the  Sermon,  on  our  Lord's  entry  into  Capernaum.  Compare 
Matt.  viii.  5,  Luke  vii.  2  sq.,  and  see  Tholuck,  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Vol.  i.  p.  5 
sq.  (Clark). 

2  This  opinion,  improbable  as  it  is  now  commonly  felt  to  be,  was  adopted  by 
as  good  an  interpreter  as  Calvin  (Harm.  Evany.  Vol.  i.  p.  13.">,  ed.  Tholuck),  and 
has  been  lately  advanced  in  a  slightly  changed  form  by  Neander,  who  attributes 
to  the  Greek  editor  (?)  of  St.  Matthew  the  insertion  of  those  expressions  of  our 
Lord  which  are  fouud  in  other  collocations  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel.  See  Life  of 
Christ,  p.  241  (Bohn).  There  is  nothing,  however,  unnatural  in  the  supposition 
that  our  blessed  Lord  vouchsafed  to  use  the  same  precepts  on  more  occasions  than 


The  healing  of  the 

centurion's  servant. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  171 

of  reconciliation  proposed  between  the  two  forms  of  this 
Sermon  vouchsafed  to  us  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  two  deserve 
consideration,  —  (a)  that  which  represents  St.  Luke's  as  a 
condensed  recital  of  what  St.  Matthew  lias  related  more 
at  length,  and  (b)  that  which  attributes  the  condensation 
to  our  Lord  Himself,  who  on  the  summit  of  the  hill  deliv- 
ered the  longer,  but,  as  it  has  been  doubtfully  termed,  eso- 
teric sermon  to  His  Apostles,  and  perhaps  disciples,  and  on 
the  level  piece  of  ground,  a  little  distance  below,  delivered 
the  shortened  and  more  popular  form  to  the  mixed  multi- 
tude.' 

But  let  us  now  pass  onward.     On  the  Lord's  return  to 
Capernaum,   which   it    does    not    seem    un- 
reasonable  to   suppose   took   place    on    the 
evening  of  the  same  day,  the  elders  of  the     ""''  ~w"»  of  ",e 

o  •>  '  widows  son. 

synagogue  of  Capernaum  meet  our  Lord 
with  a  petition  from  one  who  shared  in  the  faith,  though 
he  was  not  of  the  lineage,  of  Abraham.  This  petition,  and 
the  way  in  which  it  was  made,  deserve  a  passing  notice. 
We  see,  on  the  one  hand,  the  different  feelings  with  which 
as  yet  the  leading  party  at  Capernaum  were  animated,  when 
contrasted  with  the  emissaries  from  Jerusalem ;  and  on  the 
other  we  recognize  the  profound  humility  of  the  God-fear- 
one.  Compare  Matt.  v.  18  and  Luke  xii.  68,  Matt,  vi.  19— 21  and  Luke  xii.  33, 
Matt  vi.  24  and  Luke  xvi.  13,  Matt.  vii.  13  and  Luke  xiii.  24,  Matt.  vii.  22  and 
Luke  xiii.  25—27. 

i  Of  these  two  opinions,  the  second,  though  noticed  with  some  approval  by 
Augustine  (dr  Consensu  Erang.  II.  19),  and  convenient  for  reconciling  the  slight 
differences  as  to  locality  and  audience  which  appear  in  the  records  of  the  two 
Evangelists  (><•<•  Lange,  l.<  i>,  n  Jem,  n.  4. 12,  Part  n.  p.  56S  sq.),  has  so  much  the 
appearance  of  having  been  formed  simply  to  reconcile  these  differences,  and 
involves  so  much  that  is  unlikely,  and  indeed  unnatural,  that  we  can  hardly 
hesitate  to  adopt  the  flrstj  bo  loo,  as  it  would  seem,  Augustine,  Inc.  cit.  ad  tin. 
Comp.  Trench,  Expos.  ofSerm.  on  Mount,  p.  1G0  (ed.  2).  A  fair  comparison  of 
the  two  inspired  records  Beema  to  confirm  this  judgment,  and  satisfactorily  to 
show  that  St.  Luke's  record  is  here  a  compendium,  or  rather  selection,  of  the 
hading  precepts  which  appear  In  that  of  St.  Matthew.  No  extract,  it  maybe 
observed,  i>  made  from  ch.  vi.  (Matt.),  as  the  duties  there  specified  (almsgiving, 
pro;  er,  fasting,  etc.)  are  mainly  considered  in  reference  to  their  dne  performance 
in  (be  sight  of  God,  while  St.  Luke  appears  to  have  been  moved  to  specify  those 
which  relate  more  directly  to  our  neighbor.  For  further  notices  and  comments, 
Bee  I  lioluok,  Serm.  on  Mount,  Vol.  i.  p.  1  sq.  (Clark). 


172  THE  MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.     Lect.  IV. 

ing  soldier  who,  it  would  seem  from  St.  Luke's  account, 
twice  preferred  his  petition   by  the  mouths 

Ch.  vii.  3, 6.  _ r  *  J 

of  others,  before  he  presumed  himself  to 
speak  in  behalf  of  his  suffering  servant.  Then  followed, 
probably  from  his  own  lips,  words  of  faith  that  moved  the 
wonder  of  our  Lord  Himself,  and  forthwith  came  the 
reward  of  that  faith,' — the  healing  of  apparently  the  first 
Gentile  sufferer.1     But  the  morrow  was  to  see  yet  greater 

things ;  for,  as  St.  Luke  tells  us,  on  the  fol- 

Ch.  vii.  11  sg.  , ,  , 

lowing  day,  during  the  course  of  a  short  ex- 
cursion into  the  vale  of  Esdraelon,  the  Lord  of  life  comes 
into  first  conflict  with  the  powers  of  death.     At  the  brow 
of  that  steep  ascent,  up  which  the  modern  traveller  to  the 
hamlet  of  JVain  has  still  to  pass,2  the  Saviour,  begirt  with 
a  numerous  company  of  His  disciples  and  a  large  attendant 
multitude,  beholds    a  sad   and   pity-moving 
sight.     The  only  son  of  a  widow  was  being 
borne  out  to  his  last  resting-place,  followed  by  the  poor, 
weeping  mother,  and  a  large  and,  as  it  would  seem,  sym- 
pathizing crowd.     But  there  was   one   now 
Jr'"  nigh  at  hand  who  no  sooner  beheld  than  He 

Per.  13.  ^ 

pitied,  and  with  whom  to  pity  was  to  bless. 

The  words  of  power  were  uttered,  the  dead  at  once  rose  up 

to   life   and   speech,  and  was   given   to   the 

Ver.U.  _  l  .    '  ° 

ver.is.  widow's  arms,  while  the   amazed  multitude 

Ver.  16. 

glorified  God,  and  welcomed  as  a  mighty 
prophet  Him  who  had  done  before  their  eyes  what  their 
memories  might  have  connected  with  the  greatest  of  the 


1  For  comments  on  this  miracle,  one  of  the  characteristics  of  which  is,  that, 
as  in  the  case  of  the  nobleman's  son,  our  Lord  vouchsafed  the  cure  without  see- 
ing or  visiting  the  sufferer,  see  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  n.  6,  Trench,  Miracles,  p. 
222,  and  compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  4.  13,  Tart  II.  p.  C45  sq. 

2  See  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  ch.  ix.  352  (ed.  2).  The  Dutch  traveller 
Van  de  Velde  remarks  that  the  lock  on  the  west  side  of  Kain  is  full  of  sepulchral 
caves,  and  infers  from  this  that  our  Lord  approached  Jsain  on  the  western  side. 
Syria  and  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  382.  A  sketch  of  the  wretched-looking  but 
finely  situated  hamlet  that  still  bears  the  name  of  Jvain  or  Neiu  (Robinson, 
Palest.  Vol.  ii.  p.  361)  will  be  found  in  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  159. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  173 

prophets  of  the  past.1  It  is  here  perhaps,  or  at  one  of  the 
towns  in  the  neighborhood,  that  we  are  to  fix  the  memo- 
rable  and   affecting   scene    at   the   house  of 

Ver.  36. 

Simon   the  Pharisee,  when  the  poor  sinful 

woman  pressed  unbidden  among  tlie  guests  to  anoint,  not 

the  head,  like  the  pure  Mary  of  Bethany,  but 

i-r»        •     *         o  I'er.'S. 

the  feet   of   the    v  irgin  s    bon,    and    whose 

passionate  repentance  and  special  and   preeminent   faith 

were  blessed  with  acceptance  and  pardon.-  M 

It  is  about  the  same  time,  too,  and,  as  The naj.tiscsmet- 
appears  by  no  means  improbable,  but  a  very  "w^**"** 
lew  days  before  the  tragical  end  of  their  Master's  life,3  that 
the  two  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist  come  to  our  Lord 
with  the  formal  question  which  the,  so  to  say,  dying  man 
commissioned  them  to  ask,  —  whether  the  great  Healer, 
the  fame  of  whose  deeds  had  penetrated  into 
the  dungeons  of  Machrerus,  were  trul\r  lie  "  '*!'.  ' 

°  J  Luke  vii.  19. 

that  was  to  come,  or  whether  another  "were 

yet  to  be  expected.     The  exact  purpose  of  this  mission 

1  For  some  further  comments  on  this  miracle,  see  Cyril  Alex,  on  St.  Luke, 
Serm.  xxxvi.  Part  I.  p.  132  sq.  (Trausl.),  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  n.  1,  and  Trench, 
Notes  on  the  Miracles ,  p.  239.  Compare  also  Augustine,  Serm.  xevm.  Vol.  v. 
p  591  sq.  (ed.  Migne),  and  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  4.  16,  Part  II.  p.  740  sq. 

2  With  regard  to  tins  anointing  of  our  Lord,  we  may  briefly  remark,  (a)  that  it 
certainly  is  not  identical  with  that  which  is  specified  by  the  other  three  Evangel- 
ist-; (.Mutt.  xxvi.  G  sq.,  Mark  xiv.  3  sq.,  John  xii.  1  sq.).  Everything  is  different, 
—  the  time,  the  place,  the  chief  actor,  and  the  circumstances.  See  Meyer,  on 
Matt.  xxvi.  6,  p.  4S3,  and  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  4.  1C,  Part  n.  p.  73o.  We  may 
farther  remark  ('<)  that  there  seems  no  just  ground  for  identifying  the  repentant 
sinner  here  mentioned  witli  Mary  Magdalene,  who,  though  a  victim  to  Satanic 
influence,  and  that  too  in  a  fearful  and  aggravated  form  (Luke  viii.  2),  is  not 
di  cessarily  to  he  considered  guilty  of  Bins  of  impurity.  Nay,  more,  the  very 
description  of  the  affliction  of  Mary  Magdalene  seems  in  itself  sufficient  to  dis- 
tinguish her  from  one  whom  no  hint  of  the  Evangelist  leads  us  to  suppose  was 
then  or  formerly  had  been  a  demoniac.  The  contrary  opinion  has  been  firmly 
maintained  bj  Sepp  (/.• '»  /<  Christi,  in.  23,  Vol.  ii-  p-  285),  but  on  the  authority 
of  Rabbinical  traditions,  which  are  curious  rather  than  convincing.  On  the 
incident  generally  ,eee  Greg.  VL.Bom.  in  Evong.  xxxiii.,  Augustine,  Serm.  xcix., 
ami  especially  Bp.  Hall.  Contempt,  iv.  17. 

3  The   most    probable   period   to  which   the   murder  of  the  Baptist  is  to  be 

I  d  would  .-ceiu  to  be  the  Meek  preceding  the  Passover  of  the  second  year 
of  our  Lord's  ministry,  April  10 — 17,  A.  u.  v.  782.  I'or  the  arguments  on  which 
this  rests,  consult  Wieseler,  Cknm.  Synops.  p.  292  sq.,  and  see  below,  p.  183, 
note  .". 

15* 


174  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

will  perhaps  remain  to  the  end  of  time  a  subject  of  contro- 
versy,1 but  it  has  ever  been  fairly,  and,  as  it  would  seem, 
convincingly  urged,  that  He  whose  eyes,  scarce  sixteen 
months  before,  had  beheld  the  descending  Spirit,  whose 
ears  had  heard  the  voice  of  paternal  love  and  benediction, 
and  who  now  again  had  but  recently  been  told  of  acts  of 
omnipotent  power,  could  himself  have  never  really  doubted 
the  truth  of  his  own  declaration,2  that  this  was  indeed 
"the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh   away  the 

John  i.  20.  .  _      ,  ,  -  „ 

sin  ot  the  world. 
Almost  immediately  after  the  marvellous  scene  at  Nain, 

our  Lord,  accompanied  not  only  by  His  twelve 
fresh  chlrglToTth'e  Apostles,  but,  as  it  is  specially  recorded,  by 
FhajMcevm  2.        pious    and    grateful    women,    chief   among 

whom  stands  the  miraculously  healed  Mary 
of  Magdala,  passed  onward  from  city  to  city  and  village  to 
village,  preaching  the  kingdom  of  God.  That  circuit  could 
not  have  lasted  much  above  a  day  or  two  after  the  miracle 
at  Nain,3  and,  as  the  words  of  the  second  Evangelist  seem 

1  The  three  different  states  of  feeling  (doubt,  impatience,  desire  to  convince  his 
disciples)  which  have  been  attributed  to  the  Baptist,  as  having  given  rise  to  this 
mission,  are  noticed  and  commented  on  by  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch. 
§  73,  p.  367  sq.  For  a  full  discussion  of  the  subject,  however,  see  the  calm  and 
learned  comments  of  Jackson,  on  the  Creed,  Vol.  vi.  p.  310  sq.  Comp.  also,  but 
with  caution,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  4.  17,  Part  n.  p.  745  sq. 

2  The  utmost  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  Baptist  required  the  comfort  of  accu- 
mulated conviction  (see  Jackson,  Creed,  Vol.  vi.  p.  314);  that  he  entertained 
distrust,  or  wavered  in  faith  in  these  last  days  of  his  life,  seems  wholly  incred- 
ible. To  convince  his  disciples  (Cyril  Alex,  in  loc.)  fully  and  completely  before 
his  death,  was  the  primary  object  of  the  mission;  to  derive  some  incideutal  com- 
forts from  the  answer  he  foresaw  they  would  return  with,  may  possibly  have 
been  the  secondary  object. 

3  It  has  been  already  observed  (p.  160,  note  2),  that  the  villages,  and  even  towns, 
were  so  numerous  in  some  parts  of  Galilee,  that  the  words  of  the  Evangelist 
(Sit&Stvtv  Kara  tr6\iv  /cat  Kw/xriv  KrjpvcrcToov,  Luke  viii.  1)  need  not  be  pressed  as 
necessarily  implying  a  lengthened  circuit.  It  may  be  indeed  doubted  whether 
these  notices  of  circuits,  which  it  is  confessedly  very  difficult  to  reconcile  with 
other  notes  of  time,  may  not  be  general  descriptions  of  our  Lord's  ministry  at 
the  time  rather  than  special  notices  of  special  journeys.  That  the  circuit  had  a 
homeward  direction  and  terminated  at  Capernaum,  we  gather  from  Matt.  xiii.  1, 
which,  in  specifying  the  place  (irapa  t))v  &a\affo-av),  marks  the  day  as  the  same 
with  that  on  which  the  visit  of  our  Lord's  mother  and  brethren  took  place,  and 
so  connects  us  with  Mark  iii.  19  sq.,  which  seems  to  refer  to  the  return  from  the 
circuit  (Luke  viii.  1  sq.)  which  we  are  now  considering. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  175 

to  imply,  terminated  at  Capernaum,  which,  as  we  already 
know,  had  now  become  our  Lord's  temporary  home.  On 
their  return  two  parties  anxiously  awaited  them ;  on  the 
one  hand  the  multitude,  which,  St.  Mark  tells 
us,  gathered  so  nastily  round  the  yet  unrested 
company,  that  either  the  disciples,  or,  as  seems  more  prob- 
able from  the  sequel,  the  mother  and  brethren 

/»  tit  ii  i  Hi  Seech,  iii.  31  sq. 

of  our  Lord,  deemed  themselves  called  upon 

to  interpose,1  and  to  plead  against  what  they  could  not  but 

deem  an  almost  inconsiderate  enthusiasm.  On 

Mark  Hi.  21. 

the  other  hand,  we  still  find  there  the  hostile 
party  of  Scribes  and  Pharisees  from  Jerusalem,  whom  we 
have  already  noticed,  and  who  yet  lingered,  though  the  Pass- 
over was  so  nigh,  in  hopes  that  they  might  find  further  and 
more  definite  grounds  of  accusation.  An  opportunity,  if 
not  for  preferring  a  charge,  yet  for  attempting  to  check  the 
crowing  belief  of  the  amazed  multitude,  and 

,f    .  ,  ~      ,.  .  ,  Xatt.xO.SS. 

for  enlisting  the  worst  feelings  against  the 
very  acts  of  mercy  which  our  Lord  vouchsafed  to  perform, 
soon  presented  itself  at  the  miraculous  cure  of  a  blind  and 
dumb  demoniac,  which  appears  to  belong  to  this  portion 
of  the  sacred  narrative.2  Then  was  it  that  the  embittered 
hatred  of  these    prejudiced    and   hardened  men   showed 

1  A  little  difficulty  lias  been  felt  (a)  in  the  exact  reference  of  the  words  oi  wap' 
avrov  (Mark  iii.  21),  and  (b)  in  the  fact  that  St.  Luke  places  the  visit  of  our 
I. oids  mother  and  brethren  after  the  delivery  of  the  parables  rather  than  before 
tin-in.  With  regard  to  the  first  point,  oi  irap'  avrov  seems  clearly  to  imply,  not 
the  Apostles,  but  our  Lord's  relatives  ("  propinqtii  ejus," — Syr.),  who  are  noticed 
here  as  going  forth  (probably  from  some  temporary  abode  at  Capernaum;  see  p. 
152,  note  1),  and  a  few  verses  later  (Mark  iii.  31)  as  having  now  arrived  at  the 
house  where  our  Lord  then  was.  With  regard  to  (&),  it  seems  enough  to  say  that 
St.  Luke  clearly  agrees  with  St.  Matthew  in  placing  the  event  in  question  on  the 
same  day,  but  from  having  here  omitted  the  discourse  which  preceded  the  arrival 
(Mark  iii.  22  sq.),  he  mentions  it  a  little  out  of  its  true  chronological  order,  to 
prevent  its  being  referred  to  some  one  of  the  towns  on  the  circuit,  and  to  con- 
nect it  with  the  right  place  and  time,  —  Capernaum,  and  the  day  of  the  return. 

2  There  seems  reason  for  placing  the  narrative  of  the  healing  of  the  demoniac, 
recorded  in  Matt.  xii.  22  sq.,  between  Mark  iii.  21  and  Mark  iii.  22,  as  the  sub- 
stance of  the  words  which  follow  in  both  Gospels  are  so  clearly  alike,  and  as  the 
narrative  of  the  miracle  in  St.  Matthew  follows  that  of  other  miracles  which 
certainly  appear  to  belong  to  a  period  shortly  preceding  the  one  now  under 
consideration. 


176  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

itself  in    the   frightful    blasphemy  —  repeated,   it   would 
seem,  more  than  once1  —  that  attributed  the  wonder-work- 
ing power  of  the  eternal  Son  of  God  to  the 
a  .an.   .        energy  of  Satan  ;   and  then  too  was  it  that 

Mark  Hi.  23.  0' 

our  Lord  called  them  to  Him,  and  mercifully 
revealed  to  them  the  appalling  nature  of  their  sin,  which 
was  now  fast  approaching  the  fearful  climax  of  sin  against 
the  Holy  Ghost,  —  that  sin  for  which  there  was  no  forgive- 
ness,2 "neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  that 

Matt.  xii.  82.  m  '  ' 

The  teaching  by     which  is  to  come."     The  afternoon  or  early 

parables.  .  _     ,  -  .  ,  . 

evening  of  that  day  was  spent  by  the  snores 

of  the  lake.     The  eager  multitude,  augmented  by  others 

who   had    come   in    from    the    neighboring 

Luke  viii.  4.  i  i  • 

towns,  had  now  become  so  large,  that,  as  it 
would  seem,  for  the  sake  of  more  conveniently  addressing 
them,  our  Lord  was  pleased  to  go  on  board  one  of  the 
fishing  vessels,  and  thence,  with  the  multitude  before 
Him,  and  with  His  divine  eyes  perchance  resting  on  some 
one  of  those  patches  of  varied  and  undulating  corn-field 
which  modern  travellers  have  noticed  as  in  some  cases  on 
the  very  margin  of  the  lake,3 — with  the  earthly  and  the 
heavenly  harvest-field  thus  alike  before  Him,  —  He  deliv- 

1  Compare  Luke  xi.  17  sq.,  where  we  meet  with,  in  what  seems  clearly  a  later 
portion  of  the  history,  the  same  impious  declaration  on  the  part  of  the  Pharisees 
which  St.  Mark  (ch  iii.  22  sq.)  and  apparently  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xii.  24)  refer  to 
the  present  place.  That  such  statements  should  have  been  made  more  than  once, 
when  suggested  by  similar  miracles,  is  every  way  natural  and  probable.  Comp. 
Matt.  ix.  34  and  xii.  22  sq.,  and  see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  287  sq. 

2  On  this  highest  and  most  frightful  enhancement  of  sin  in  the  individual,  of 
which  the  essential  characteristic  appears  to  be  an  outward  exjyression  (see 
Waterland)  of  an  inward  hatred  of  that  which  is  recognized  and  felt  to  be 
divine,  and  the  irremissible  nature  of  which  depends,  not  on  the  refusal  of  grace, 
but  on  the  now  lost  ability  of  fulfilling  the  conditions  required  for  forgiveness, 
see  the  able  remarks  of  Muller,  Doctrine  of  Sin,  Book  v.  Vol.  n.  p.  475  (Clark), 
and  the  good  sermon  of  Waterland,  Serin,  xxviii.  Vol.  v.  p.  707.  For  further 
comments  on  this  profound  subject,  see  Augustine,  Serin,  lxxi.  Vol.  v.  p.  445  sq. 
(ed.  Migne),  the  special  work  on  the  subject  by  Schaff  (Halle,  1841),  and  the  arti- 
cle by  Tholuck,  in  the  Studien  u.  Kritihen  for  1826,  compared  with  the  earlier 
articles  in  the  same  periodical  by  Grashoff  (1833)  and  Gurlitt  (1S31). 

3  See  the  interesting  and  illustrative  remarks  of  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine, 
ch.  xm.  p.  421  sq  ;  and,  in  reference  to  the  parable,  compare  the  elucidations, 
from  local  observation,  of  Thomson,  The  Laud  and  the  Book,  Vol.  i.  p.  115  sq. 


Lect.  IV.        THE    MINISTRY    IN    EASTERN    GALILEE.  177 

ered  to  that  listening  concourse  the  wondrous  series  of 
parables  beginning  with  that  appropriately  chosen  subject, 
specified  alike  by  all  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists,  — 
the  Sower  and  the  seed.1 

And  now,  as  St.  Mark  specifies,  the  evening  had  come, 
and  after  that  long  and  exhausting  day  the 
Holy  One  needed  retirement  and  repose,  and     across  and  storm 

i  ii-i  t  i  ,    .     •  ■•        ontlte  lake. 

nowhere  could  it  be  more  readily  obtained 

J  Mark  w.  35. 

than  in  the  solitudes  of  the  eastern  shore. 
The  multitudes  still  linger;  but  the  Apostles  bear  away 
their  wearied  Master,  "  as   lie  was,"  says   the  graphic   St. 
Mark,  in  the  vessel  from  which  He  had  been 

Ver.  3G. 

preaching.     As  they  sail  the  Lord  slumbers; 

when  from  one  of  the  deep  clefts  of  the  surrounding  hills2 

a  storm   of  wind  bursts  upon  the  lake,  and 

.  .  ,  .  .11  Luke  viii. '23. 

the  stirred-up  waters  beat  in  upon  the  boat.         jIarkiv.sr. 
Terror-stricken,   the    disciples    awake    their 
sleeping   Master,   and   He,   who  only   a  few         KS* 
hours  before  had  driven   forth   devils,  now 
quells  by  His  word  the  lesser  potencies  of  wind  and  storm.3 
"When  they  reached  the  opposite  side,  which  might  have 


1  On  the  connection  of  tbe  parables,  of  which  this  forms  the  first,  see  Lect.  i. 
p.  35,  note  3. 

2  "To  understand,"  says  Dr.  Thomson,  who  himself  witnessed  on  the  very 
spot  a  storm  of  similar  violence,  and  that  lasted  as  long  as  three  days,  "  the  causes 
of  these  sudden  and  violent  tempers,  we  must  remember  that  the  lake  lies  low 
[hence  Kcnt/ir)  Ka7\aip,  Luke  viii.  23],  — six  hundred  feet  lower  than  the  ocean; 
that  the  vast  and  naked  plateaus  of  Jauhin  rise  to  a  great  height,  spreading  back- 
ward to  the  wild8  of  the  Hauran,and  upward  to  snowy  Hermon;  that  the  water- 
courses have  cut  out  profound  ravines  and  wild  gorges,  converging  to  the  head 
of  this  lake,  and  that  these  act  like  gigantic  funnels  to  draw  down  the  winds 
from  the  mountains." —  The  Land  and  the  Bool;,  Vol.  iii.  pp.  32,  33.  See  also 
Hitter,  Erdkunde,  Part  xv.  1,  p.  308  sq.,  where  the  peculiar  nature  of  these 
Btorm-winds  Is  briefly  noticed. 

3  For  further  comments  on  this  miracle,  one  of  the  more  striking  features  of 
which  is  the  Saviour's  rebuke  to  tbe  waning  elements,  the  very  words  of  which, 
as  addressed  to  the  storm-tost  waterBCrai  tfira  tj;  AaAaacnj,  2ia)7ra,  vecplfuoao, 
Hark  iv.  89),  have  been   specially  recorded   by  the  second   Evangelist.  — see  the 

tory  remarks  of  Chrysostom,  in  Matt.  Hum.  xxvm..  the  typical  and 
practical  application  of  Augustine,  Serm.  lxiii.  (ed.  Higne),  Trench,  Notes  an 
the  Miracles,  p.  143,  sq.,  aud  compare  Hook,  Serm.  on  the  Miracles,  Vol.  i.  p. 
207  ••!• 


178  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  IX. 

been  late  that  evening,  or  more  probably  studiously  de- 
layed till  the  dawn  of  the  following  day,  our 
7v  Genjescne     Tj0i-d  naj  n0  sooner  s;one  out  of  the  vessel 

demoniacs.  P 

than  He  was  met  by  the  hapless  Gergesene1 

demoniac  or  demoniacs,2  wdiose  home  was  in  the  tombs, 

that  can  still  be  traced  in  more  than  one  of 

Mark  v.  3. 

the  ravines  that  open  out  upon  the  lake 
on  its  eastern  side.3  There,  and  in  the  solitudes  of  the 
desert  mountains  behind,  dwelt  the  wretched  and,  as  it 

would  seem,  sinful  man,  who  by  his  Lord's  own 

Luke  viii.  39.  '  •> 

divine  command  was  hereafter  to  be  Christ's 
first  preacher  in  his  own  household,  and  who 

Mark  r.  20.  L  ' 

told  abroad  the  blessings  he  had  received 
through    the   surrounding    land   of  Decapolis.      How   he 


1  Whether  the  true  reading  in  Matt.  viii.  28  be  Tepyen-qvuv,  Ta^apfjvwu,  or 
Tepacrrii  Siv,  is  a  question  which  cannot  easily  be  answered.  On  the  whole,  how- 
ever, if  we  assign  due  weight  not  only  to  the  evidence  of  manuscripts  but  also 
to  recent  geographical  discovery,  we  shall,  perhaps,  be  led  to  adopt  the  first 
reading  in  St.  Matthew  and  the  second  in  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke.  The  grounds 
on  which  this  decision  rests  are  as  follows:  (1)  The  amount  of  external  evidence 
in  favor  of  Yzpyeo-nvwi'  in  Matt.  viii.  28  (see  Tischendorf  in  loc.)  is  much  too 
great  to  be  due  solely  to  the  correction  of  Origen;  (2)  Origen  plainly  tells  us  that 
there  toas  a  place  in  his  time  so  named,  and  that  the  exact  site  of  the  miracle 
was  pointed  out  to  that  day;  (3)  ruins  have  been  recently  discovered  by  Dr. 
Thomson  in  Wady  Semak,  still  bearing  the  name  of  Kerza  or  Gerza,  which  are 
pronounced  to  fulfil  every  requirement  of  the  narrative.  See,  especially.  The 
Land  and  the  Boole,  Vol.  ii.  p.  33  sq.,  and  compare  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir  to 
Map,  p.  311.  The  probable  reading  in  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  (TaSap-nvHv)  may 
be  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  they  were  content  with  indicating  generally 
the  scene  of  the  miracle,  while  St.  Matthew,  whose  knowledge  of  the  shores  of 
the  lake  whereon  he  was  collector  of  dues  would  naturally  be  precise,  speciiies 
the  exact,  spot. 

2  Of  the  current  explanations  of  the  seeming  difficulty  that  St.  Matthew 
names  two  and  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  one  demoniac,  that  of  Chrysostom  (in 
loc.)  and  Augustine  (de  Consensu  Evany,  u.  24)  seems  most  satisfactory,  viz.  that 
one  of  the  demoniacs  took  so  entirely  the  prominent  part  as  to  cause  two  of  the 
narrators  to  omit  all  mention  of  his  companion.  We  have  no  reason  for 
inferring  from  St.  Matthew  that  the  second  of  the  sufferers  did  more  than  join 
in  the  opening  cry  of  deprecation.     See  Matt.  viii.  29. 

3  Sec  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Booh,  Vol.  ii.  p.  35.  Tombs  have  also  been 
observed  in  Wady  Flk  on  the  side  of  the  road  leading  up  from  the  lake  (Stan- 
ley, Palestine,  eh.  x.  p.  376),  the  position  of  which  has  perhaps  led  to  that 
ravine  being  usually  selected  as  the  scene  of  the  miracle;  if,  however,  the  above 
identification  of  Tepyifra  and  Gerza  be  accepted,  the  scene  of  the  miracle  must 
be  transferred  to  the  more  northern  Wady  Semak. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  179 

was  healed,  the  astonishing  and  most  convincing  way  in 
which  every  line  of  the  narrative  sets  before  us  the  awful 
kind  of  double  or  rather  manifold  personality, 

*  Ver.  9. 

the  kneeling  man  of  the  one  moment  and  the 

O  Ver.  6. 

shouting  demoniac  of  the  next,  the  startling 
yet  all-wise  permission  given  to  the  devils,1  and  the  over- 
powered instinct  of  self-preservation  in  the  possessed 
swine,  —  all  this  our  present  limits  preclude  me  from 
pausing  fully  to  delineate ;  but  this  one  comment  I  will 
venture  to  make,  that  with  this  miracle  before  us,  with 
expressions  so  unqualified,  and  terms  so  distinct,  a  denial 
of  the  reality  of  demoniacal  possession  on  the  part  of 
anyone  who  believes  the  Gospel  narrative  to  be  true  and 
inspired,  may  justly  be  regarded  as  simply  and  plainly 
inconceivable.2 

On  the  Lord's  return  to  the  western  side,        n,e  raisin  of 

.  .  Juirus' daughter. 

which  took  place  immediately  in  consequence 
of  the  request  of  the  terror-stricken  inhab- 
itants of  the   neighboring  city,  lie  found  the  multitude 


l  On  this  much  debated  subject  we  may  briefly  observe,  (a)  that  the  permission 
to  enter  into  the  herd  of  swine  may  have  been  deemed  necessary  by  our  Lord 
(noAAa  ivTtii&tv  oIkovoixwv,  Chrvs.)  to  convince  the  sufferer  of  his  cure  (Chrys. 
I.)j  (6)  that  it  may  also  stand  in  connection  with  some  unknown  laws  of  demo- 
niacal possession  generally,  and  more  particularly  with  that  which  the  demons 
dreaded,  deprecated,  and  perhaps  foresaw,  —  a  return  to  the  abyss  (Luke  viii. 
31).  It  maybe  that  to  defer  that  return  they  ask  to  be  suffered  to  enter  into 
fresh  objects  in  that  district  to  which  they  mysteriously  Clung  (Mark  v.  10),  and 
it  maybe  too  that  the  very  permitted  entry,  by  destroying  the  instinct  of  self- 
preservation  in  the  swine,  brought  about,  even  in  a  more  ruinous  way,  the  issue 
tin;,  so  much  dreaded.  That  this  was  (e)  further  designed  to  punish  the  people 
fur  keeping  swine  is  not  perfectly  clear,  as  the  inhabitants  of  those  parts  wer< 
mainly  (.entile.  Compare  Joseph.  Antiq.  xvn.  11.  4.  The  supposition  that  the 
swine  were  driven  down  the  precipice  by  the  demoniacs  (Kuinoel,  followed  by 
Mil  man,  Hist,  qf  Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p.  238)  is  not  only  in  the  highest  degree 
Improbable,  but  wholly  at  variance  with  the  express  Statements  of  the  inspired 
writers. 

'i  For  some  good  remarks  on  this  subject,  sec  Olshauscn,  Commentary,  Vol.  i. 
p.  305  sq.  (Clark).  Trench,  Notes  <■,,  the  Miracles,  p.  151  sq.,  AJford  m  Matt.  viii. 
32,  and  compare  Kitto,  Journal  qfSacr.  l.ii.  No.  vn.  p.  1  sq.,  No.  xiv.  p.  S'Jl  sq. 
In  addition  to  these,  on  the  miracle  generally,  see  Chrysostom on  Matt.  Horn. 
xxvn.,  the  good  comments  of  Maldonatus  on  Matt.  I.  <■.,  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt. 
in.  5,  and  compare  Jones  of  Nay  land,  Works;  Vol.  v.  p.  72  sq.,  and  Bp.  Wilbcr- 
force,  Serin,  p.  107. 


180  THE  MINISTRY  IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

eagerly  waiting  to  receive  Him,  and  among  them  one  anx- 
ious and   heart-stricken   man,  Jairus,  whose 

Luke  viii.  40.  . 

daughter  lay  clying,  and  who   besought  our 

Lord  with  all  the  passion  of  a  father's  love   to  save  his 

child.     But  the  crowd  hung  round  the  Lord, 

and  the  case  of  the  suffering  woman,  who 

Ver.  43  sq.  &  ' 

touched  her  Saviour's  garments  with  the 
touch  of  faith,1  added  to  the  delay,  and  the  daughter  of 
the  ruler  of  the  synagogue  had  breathed  her  last  before 

the  Lord  could  reach  the  father's  house;2  so 
LvLIiu.49.       they  tell  Him  that  all  was  over.     But  now 

was  the  glory  of  God  to  be  revealed.  Yet 
again  a  second  time  —  as  once  on  the  bier,  so  now  on  the 
bed  —  did  the  Lord  loose  the  bands  of  death ;  with  how- 
ever this  very  striking  and  peculiar  difference,  that  what 

a  few  days   before  was  done  in  the  sight  of 

Ch.  vii.  11.  .     J  .  .  .  ° 

all  .Nam,  was  here  done  in  strict  privacy,  with 

three  chosen  Apostles  and  the  father  and  mother  alone 

present,   and    with   the    special   and   urgent 

Mark  V.  43.  *  .,  .  .  , 

command  to  those  present  not  to  raise  the 
veil  of  the  solemn  scene  they  had  been  permitted  to 
witness.3 


1  On  this  miracle,  the  characteristics  of  which  are  the  great  faith  of  the  sufferer, 
and  the  indirect  though  not  unconscious  performance  of  the  cure,  see  Hall, 
Contempt,  iv.  7,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  189  sq.,  Hook,  Serm.  on  the 
Miracles,  Vol.  i.  p.  242  sq.;  and  compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  IV.  4.  14,  Part  n. 
p.  681. 

2  The  slight  difference  between  the  narrative  of  St.  Matthew,  in  which  the 
father  speaks  of  his  daughter  as  now  dead  (ch.  ix.  18),  and  that  of  St.  Mark, 
where  he  speaks  of  her  as  being  at  the  last  gasp  (ch.  v.  23),  has  been  accounted 
for  most  reasonably  by  Augustine  (de  Conceits.  Evang.  n.  2),  Theophylact  (1st 
alternative),  and  others,  by  the  supposition  that  Jairus  spoke  from  what  his 
fears  suggested,  and  that  he  regarded  the  death  of  his  daughter  as  by  that  time 
having  actually  taken  place.     Comp.  Greswell,  Dissert,  in.  Vol.  i.  p.  217. 

8  This  command,  which  Meyer  (on  Mark  v.  43)  most  rashly  considers  a  mere 
unauthorized  addition  of  later  tradition,  is  perfectly  in  harmony  with  the  pri- 
vate manner  in  which  the  miracle  was  performed.  The  reason  v'hy  it  was  given 
can,  however,  only  be  conjectured.  It  can  scarcely  have  been  on  account  of  the 
Jews  (Sia  Tt>e  (pSi6vou  ia.ya  Tcic  'lovSaicav,  Theophyl.  on  Luke  viii.  66),  but  may 
very  probably  have  been  suggested  by  a  desire  to  avoid  undue  publicity,  and 
perhaps  also  by  merciful  considerations  of  what  the  Lord  knew  to  be  best  lor 
the  maiden  and  her  relatives.    Compare  Olshausen,  Commentary  on  Gospels, 


Lect.  IV.       THE  MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.  181 

Soon    after  this,  perhaps  on   the  same  day,  our  Lord, 
accompanied  by  His  disciples,  leaves  Caper- 

1  ,       *  .    -     .  , .  Ttir  second  visit 

naum,  and  on  the  Sabbath  which  immediately     «»*»«  synagogue  at 

.  -i    •  i  JSazareth. 

followed  again  appeared  in  the  synagogue  at 

His  own  town   of  Nazareth.1      The  feeling  there  is  now 

in   some    deerree    better   than    it  was   three 

°  Luke  iv.  Ksq. 

weeks   before.      The   fame   that   spread    all 
through  Galilee  had  produced  some  effect  even  at  Naza- 
reth, and  had  disposed  them  to  give  ear  a  second  time  to 
Him   whose    wisdom    and   even    miraculous 

Mark  vi.  2. 

powers  they  were  forced  to  recognize  and 
to  confess.     But  the  inward  heart  of  the  men  of  Nazareth 
was  unchanged  as  ever.    Though  there  was  now  no  longer 
that  open  indignation   and  murderous  racje 

.  .  Ver.28. 

that  was  so  frightfully  manifested  at  the 
former  visit,  there  was  a  similar  vexed  spirit  of  amaze- 
ment and  incredulity,  and  a  similar  and  even  more  scorn- 
fully worded  appeal  to  family  connections  of  low  estate, 
and  to  kindred  that  had  long  lived  humbly  among  them: 
"  Is  not  this  the  carpenter,  the  son  of  Mary,  and  the  brother 
of  James  and  Joscs  and  Judas  and  Simon?" 

x      •  i  n*  •  Mark  vi.  3. 

It  is  now,  however,  offence  rather  than  posi- 
tive rejection,  —  yet  offence  that  sprang  from  a  deep  heart 
of  unbelief,  which  staved  the  Saviour's  heal- 

J  Malt.  xiii.  68. 

ing  hands,  and  made  Him,  who  knew  full 

well  what  it  was  to  meet  with  rejection  and  want  of  faith, 

to  marvel  at  the  exceeding  measures  of  Naz- 

°  ,  Mark.  vi.  G. 

arene  unbelief.     On  the  eve  of  that  day,  or 

more  probably  early  on  the  morrow,  our  Lord  appears  to 

Vol.  i.  p.  270  (Clark).  On  the  miracle  itself  sec  the  good  comments  of  Chrysost. 
in  Matt,  llinii.  xxxi.,  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  it.  8,  Lardner's  vindication,  Works, 
Vol.  xi.  p.  1  Bq.,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  179,  and  Lange,  Leben  Jesu, 
a.  4.  11,  Part  ii.  p.  083  s<p 

l  That  this  vjmi  to  Nazareth  is  not  identical  with  thai  recorded  by  St.  Luke 
(ch.  iv.  16)  is  rightly  maintained  by  Meyer,  <>a  Matt.  xiii.  64.  The  only  argument 
for  the  identity  is  our  Lord's  use  of  the  same  proverb  on  both  occasions;  hut  is 
there  anything  Btrange  In  such  a  repetition,  especially  when  the  conduct  of  the 
people  of  Nazareth  on  each  occasion  rendered  such  a  proverb  most  mournfully 
pertinent  J    See  Wieseler,  ( %ron.  Synnjis.  p.  234  sq. 

10 


182  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

have  commenced  a  short  circuit  of  Galilee,  but,  as  we 
must   conclude  from  our   general   notes  of 

The        sending  .  ,    .  .  • 

jbnh  of  the  Twelve  time,  in  the  direction  of  Capernfium ;  and  at 
this  same  time  also  it  would  certainly  appear 

that  He  sent  forth  the  twelve  Apostles  (who  we  know 
accompanied  Him  to  Nazareth),  by  two  and 

Markvi.6.  r  .  "       \ 

two,   probably   in   different    directions,    and 

perhaps  with  an   order,  after   having    made  a  brief  trial 

of  the    powers  with  which   they  had   been 

Mark  vi.  12.  %  ....,,  ~ 

intrusted,  to  join  their  Master  at  Caper- 
naum. Thither  they  must  have  returned,  it  would  seem, 
not  more  than  two  days  afterwards.2  Such  a  statement 
may  at  first  seem  startling.  It  may  be  urged  that  so  short 
an  absence  on  the  part  of  the  Apostles  is  hardly  compat- 
ible with  the  instructions  given  to  them  by  our  Lord,  as 

recorded    by   the    first    Evangelist,    wherein 

Matt,  x.osq.  .  J  .  . 

distant  and  continued  journeymgs  would 
seem  rather  to  be  contemplated  than  the  limited  circuit 
which  our  present  chronology  suggests.3     The  objection  is 

1  The  Sabbath  on  which  our  Lord  preached  at  Nazareth  would  certainly  seem 
to  be  the  Sabbath  which  succeeded  the  ffafifiaTov  deuTtpoirpwTov  (Luke  vi.  1), 
and  consequently,  according  to  our  explanation  of  the  latter  term,  the  second 
Sabbath  of  Nisan.  Now  if  we  turn  to  our  tables  (Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p. 
4S4),  we  find  that  our  present  Sabbath  answers  to  Nisan  13,  and  therefore  must 
conclude  that  both  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles  returned  to  Capernaum  from 
their  respective  missionary  journeys  on  the  following  day,  there  being  good 
reason  for  fixing  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  on  the  Passover-eve,  Nisan 
14.  See  below,  and  compare  John  vi.  4.  Such  a  result  can  hardly  be  conceived 
natural.  The  difficulty,  however,  may  be  in  some  degree  removed  by  taking 
into  consideration  the  fact  that  the  first  day  of  the  Jewish  month  was  fixed  by 
observation,  and  that  the  day  of  the  Julian  calendar  with  which  it  agrees  can 
hardly  be  determined  with  perfect  certainty.  In  the  case  of  Nisan  1  in  the  pres- 
ent year,  the  correct  time  of  new  moon  was  about  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening 
of  April  2;  the  new  moon  would  then  probably  be  observed  on  the  evening  of 
April  4  (see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  446).  But  the  Jewish  day  begins  after  six 
o'clock;  Nisan  1  would  then  begin  on  April  4,  but  really  coincide  with  April  5, 
and  not  with  April  4,  as  Wieseler  and  Warm  suppose.  The  date  of  our  present 
Sabbath  would  then  be  Nisan  12,  and  not  Nisan  11,  and  we  should  have  two 
whole  days  for  the  absence  of  the  Apostles,  a  time  not  improbably  short.  See 
below.  Such  niceties  and  difficulties  may  well  teach  us  caution,  and  may  justly 
make  us  very  diffident  as  to  our  ability  to  assign  each  event  in  tins  portion  of  the 
sacred  narrative  to  the  true  day  on  which  it  occurred. 

2  See  the  preceding  note. 

3  Another  objection  may  perhaps  be  founded  on  the  declaration  of  St.  Mark 


Lect.  IV.       THE    MINISTRY    IN    EASTERN    GALILEE.  183 

certainly  not  without  force,  and  is  useful  in  warning  us  not 
to  be  too  confident  either  on  the  construction  of  our  chro- 
nological tables,  or  in  the  correctness  of  our  collocation  of 
individual  events.  Still,  when  we  consider,  —  First,  that 
it  is  far  from  improbable  that  St.  Matthew  has  incorporated 
in  this  address  to  the  Apostles  instructions  given  to  them 
by  our  Lord  at  other  periods  of  His  ministry;1  /Secondly, 
that  the  address,  whether  in  its  longer  or  its  shorter  form, 
may  reasonably  be   supposed  to  extend  far 

J  J  \  c  Vamp.  Matt.  x.  23. 

beyond  the  present  time,  and  to  refer  to 
periods  of  missionary  labor  as  yet  still  distant;  Thirdly, 
that  it  does  not  seem  probable  that  our  Lord  would  have 
long  dispensed  with  the  attendance  of  those  to  whom  His 
blessed  presence  was  so  vital  and  so  essential,2  —  when  we 
consider  all  these  points,  it  will  perhaps  seem  less  improb- 
able that  this  first  missionary  journey  was  but  short,  and 
that  the  Apostles  returned  to  Capernaum  as  early  as  the 
evening  of  the  second  day.  The  return  was  nearly,  it 
would  seem,  contemporaneous  with  the  arrival  of  the 
tidings  of  the  Baptist's  murder;3  and  it  was,  perhaps,  partly 

tliat  our  Lord  "went  round  about  the  villages,  teaching"  (ch.  vi.  6;  comp.  Matt. 
ix.  3.3).  This  is  also  of  some  weight,  but  as  we  find  no  special  note  of  time  serv- 
ing to  define  it  as  subsequent  to  the  visit  to  Nazareth,  and  prior  to  the  sending 
fcrth  of  the  Twelve,  we  may  perhaps  justly  and  correctly  regard  it  either  (a)  as 
Serving  only  to  mark  that  our  Lord's  ministry  was  continuous,  that  He  did  not 
remain  at  Nazareth,  but  was  extending  His  blessings  to  other  places;  or,  still 
more  simply,  (b)  as  merely  specifying  the  work  in  which  our  Lord  was  then 
engaged,  and  as  preparing  the  reader  for  a  transition  to  other  subjects  (ver. 

7—  29).     See  above,  p.  174.  note  3. 

i  When  we  remember  that  St.  Matthew  does  not  notice  the  sending  forth  of 
the  8eventj ,  and,  further,  when  we  compare  the  instructions  delivered  to  them, 
as  recorded  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  x.  ii),  with  those  which  are  here  recorded  by  St. 
Matthew,  as  delivered  to  the  Twelve  (ch.  x.  2  sq.),  it  seems  hard  to  resist  the  con- 
viction that  as  the  lirst  l',\  angelist  was  moved  in  the  preceding  chapters  to  group 
miracles  together,  so  ill  the  present  case  he  is  presenting  in  a  collected  form  all 
our  Lord's  instructions  on  the  subject  of  missionary  duties  and  labors  generally. 
Bee  a  comparison  of  the  parallel  passages  in  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synopa.  p.  303. 

2  it  is  right  to  remember  that  the  formal  appointment  of  the  Twelve  can 
scarcely  be  placed  farther  back  than  a  week  or  ten  days  from  the  present  time. 
Some  of  the  number,  we  know,  bad  been  already  long  enough  with  our  Lord  as 
disciples  for  as  to  conceive  that  they  might  have  been  enabled  to  teach  and 
preach  for  some  time  without  being  sustained  by  His  presence,  but  this  can 
hardly  be  <<-!t  In  rcfi  rence  to  all  the  Apostles. 

2  It  seem-  probable  that  the  death  of  the  Baptist  took  place  somewhere  about 


184  THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

on  this  account,  and  partly  for  the  sake  of  communing  in 
stillness  with  His  chosen  ones  after  their  first 

Comp.  Matt.  xiv.  .  _         _       ,  . 

i3.  missionary  efiorts,  that  our  Lord  thought  it 

Mark  vi  3i  meet  to  avoid  the  many  comers  and  goers 

which  a  time  so  close  to  the  Passover  would 

Per.  31. 

be  sure  to  set  in  motion,  and  to  seek  rest 
and  privacy  by  retiring  with  His  Apostles  to  the  solitudes 
of  the  further  side  of  the  lake. 

But  rest  and  privacy  were  not  to  be  obtained.     A  very 

short  time,  especially  when  we  remember  the 
JVS12     Probable   vicinity  of  the  city  of  Bethsaida- 

Julias,1  and  the  numbers  that  might  now  have 
been  moving  about  the  country,  would  have  served  to  have 
brought  the  five  thousand  round  our  Lord ;  and  there,  on 
the  green  table-lands  on  the  northeastern   corner  of  the 

lake,  or  amid  the  "  ere  en  grass  "  of  the  rich 

Mark  vi.  39.  ,     .  '  ,  °,  „  ° ,  _      .,  - 

plain  near  the  mouth  of  the  Jordan/  must 

we  place  the  memorable  scene  of  the  miraculous  feeding  of 

that  vast  multitude.     Memorable  indeed, — 

Matt.  xiv.  21.  _ .       ,  n       .  . 

memorable  for  the  display  ot  the  creative 
power  of  the  eternal  Son  that  wTas  then  made  before  more 


a  week  before  the  time  now  under  consideration.  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops. 
p.  292  sq.  Much,  however,  turns  on  the  meaning  assigned  to  the  term  ysvecria, 
(Matt.  xiv.  6,  Mark  vi.  21).  If  it  refers  to  the  festival  in  honor  of  the  birthday  of 
Herod  Antipas  (Meyer),  no  precise  date  for  the  murder  of  the  Baptist  can  be 
obtained  from  this  portion  of  the  narrative;  if,  however,  as  seems  not  unlikely, 
it  refers  to  the  festival  in  honor  of  the  commencement  of  Herod's  reign,  then  an 
approximately  close  date  can  easily  be  arrived  at,  as  Herod  the  Great,  whom 
Herod  Antipas  succeeded  in  the  government  of  Galilee  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xvn.  8. 
1),  is  known  to  have  died  a  few  days  before  the  Passover,  a.  u.  c.  750.  See  Lect. 
ii.  p.  81,  note  1. 

1  This  appears  to  have  been  a  place  of  some  size  and  importance.  It  was  trans- 
formed by  Philip  from  a  mere  village  into  a  populous  and  handsome  town  (see 
Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2. 1),  of  which  some  traces  are  thought  to  have  been  found 
on  some  rising  ground  on  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan  and  not  far  from  the  head 
of  the  lake.  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  413,  Thomson,  The  Land  and 
the  Booh,  Vol.  ii.  p.  9,  and  compare  Winer,  PWB.  Vol.  ii.  p.  174. 

2  See  Stanley,  Palestine,  ch.  x.  p.  377,  and  especially  Thomson,  The  Zand  and 
the  Pool;  Vol.  ii.  p.  29,  where  it  is  stated  that  the  exact  site  of  the  miracle  may 
almost  confidently  be  identified.  For  a  confutation  of  the  rashly  advanced 
opinion  that  St.  Luke  places  the  scene  of  the  miracle  on  the  western  shore  (De 
Wette,  comp.  Winer,  liWB.  Vol.  i.  p.  175),  see  Meyer  on  Luke  ix.  10. 


Lect.  IV.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   EASTERN    GALILEE.  185 

than  five  thousand  witnesses;  memorable  too  for  the 
strange  coincidence  that  on  the  very  eve  that  the  Paschal 
lambs  were  being  offered  up  in  the  temple-courts  of  Jeru- 
salem, the  eternal  Lamb  of  God  was  feeding  His  people  in 
the  wilderness  with  the  bread  which  His  own  divine  hands 
had  multiplied!1 

And  now  I  must  draw  these  words  and  this  portion  of 
our  Master's  life  at  once  to  a  close,  yet  not 
without  the  prayer  that  this  effort  to  set  „££**"  re' 
forth  the  narrative  of  a  most  solemn  and 
eventful  period  —  the  period  of  the  Lord's  founding  His 
Church  —  may  be  blessed  by  His  Spirit.  To  be  confident 
of  the  accuracy  of  details,  either  of  time  or  place,  where 
not  only  the  connection  of  individual  events,  but  the  ar- 
rangement of  the  whole  period,  is  a  matter  of  the  utmost 
doubt  and  difficulty,  would  indeed  argue  a  rash  and  self- 
satisfied  spirit;  yet  this  I  will  presume  to  say,  that  if  certain 
chronological  data  and  reasonings  be  approximately  cor- 
rect,—  and  after  manifold  testings  correct  in  the  main  I 
do  verily  believe  them  to  be,  —  then  the  general  picture 
can  hardly  be  much  otherwise  than  as  it  has  been  here 
sketched  out.  Be  this  however  as  it  may,  I  count  all  as 
nought  if  only  I  have  succeeded  in  the  great  object  which 
these  Lectures  are  intended  to  promote,  if  only,  by  pre- 
senting some  sketches  of  the  continued  life  of  the  Saviour, 
I  may  have  been  enabled  to  bring  that  Saviour  nearer  to 
one  heart  in  this  church.  On  that  holy  life,  on  all  its 
divine  harmonies,  on  all  its  holy  mysteries,  may  we  be 
moved  more  and  more  to  dwell.  By  meditating  on  the 
inspired  records  may  we  daily  acquire  increasing  measures 
of  that  fulness  of  conviction,  to  have  which   in  its  most 

l  On  this  miracle,  which,  as  has  been  often  observed,  is  the  only  one  found  in 
all  tin-  lour  Gospels,  and  which,  when  compared  with  the  miracle  of  turning  the 
water  into  wine  (John  ii.  1  Bq.),  Bhows  our  Lord's  creative  powers  in  reference  to 
quantity,  as  the  latter  does  his  transforming  (powers  as  to  qua!  it  a,  Bee  Origen,  hi 
Matt.  \i.  l,  Vol.  iii.  p.  -17')  Bq. (ed  Bened.), Augustine,  in  Jonm.  Tract,  xxiv. 
Vol.  iii.  p,  1592  sq. (ed.  Uigne),  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  iv.  "(.Trench,  Notes  on  the 
Miracles,  p.  361,  and  a  good  sermon  by  .Mill,  I'nic.  S<.im.  XVI.  ji.  301. 

1G* 


186  THE  MINISTRY  IN  EASTERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  IV. 

complete  proportions  is  to  enjoy  the  greatest  earthly 
blessing  which  the  Lord  has  reserved  for  those  that  love 
Him.  This  is  indeed  to  dwell  with  the  Lord  on  earth  ;x 
this  is  indeed  to  feel  His  spiritual  presence  around  us  and 
about  us,  and  yet  to  feel,  with  no  ascetic  severity,  but  in 
sober  truth,  that  we  have  here  no  abiding  city,  but  that 
there,  where  He  is,  is  our  true  and  everlasting  home; 
there,  by  the  shores  of  that  crystal  sea,  our 
heavenly  Gennesareth ;  there  that  new  Jeru- 

Rev.  xxi.  23.  .  . 

Heb.xi.w.         salem,  whose  light  is  the  light  of  the  Lamb, 
—  the  "city  which   has   foundations,  whose 
builder  and  maker  is  God." 


1  "  Do  not  then,"  says  the  wise  and  eloquent  Bp.  Hall,  "  conceive  of  this  union 
as  some  imaginary  tiling  that  hath  no  existence  but  in  the  brain,  or  as  if  it  were 
merely  an  accidental  or  metaphorical  union  by  way  of  figurative  resemblance; 
but  know  that  this  is  a  real  and  substantial  union,  whereby  the  believer  is  indis- 
solubly  united  to  the  glorious  person  of  the  Son  of  God.  Know  that  this  union 
is  not  more  mystical  than  certain,  that  in  natural  unions  there  may  be  more  evi- 
dence but  cannot  be  more  truth.  Neither  is  there  so  firm  and  close  a  union 
betwixt  the  soul  and  body  as  there  is  betwixt  Christ  and  the  believing  soul ;  for- 
asmuch as  that  may  be  severed  by  death,  but  this  cannot."—  Christ  Mystical, 
ch.  ii.    See  above,  Lect.  m.  p.  142,  note  2. 


LECTURE   V. 

THE  MINISTRY   IX  NORTHERN  GALILEE. 


AND   HE  SAID  UNTO  TUEM,   I  MUST  PREACH  THE  KINGDOM  OP  GOD  TO  OTHER 
CITIES  ALSO:    FOR  THEREFORE  AM  I   SENT. —  St.  Luke  iv.  43. 


I  have  chosen  these  words,  brethren,  which  really  belong 
to  a  slightly  earlier  period1  than  that  which  we  are  now 
about  to  consider,  as  nevertheless  a  very  suitable  text  for 
that  part  of  our  Master's  history  which  will  occupy  our 
attention  this  afternoon. 

In  the  portion  of  the  inspired  narrative  now  before  us, 
we    have   the   brief  yet   deeply   interesting 

J  l     J  °  General  features 

notices  of  more  widely,  extended  journeys  nfthu  partem* 
and  more  prolonged  circuits.  We  find  the 
clear  traces  of  missionary  travel  to  the  west  and  to  the 
cast  and  to  the  north,  and  we  read  the  holy  record  of  deeds 
of  mercy  performed  in  remote  regions,  both  of  Galilee  and 
the  lands  across  the  Jordan,2  which  the  Lord  had  not,  as  it 


1  The  exact  time  when  these  words  were  uttered  by  our  Lord  was  the  morn- 
ing  following  the  first  Sabbath  at  Capernaum,  when  the  amazed  but  grateful 
multitudes  were  pressing  Him  not  to  leave  the  jilaee  He  had  so  greatly  blessed. 
See  Lect,  iv.  ].   L60. 

-'  It  has  not  been  easy  to  select  a  single  term  which  should  correctly  describe 
thi'  principal  BCene  ol'  the  ministerial  labors  of  our  Lord  which  come  before  us 
in  this  Lecture.  The  known  geographical  divisions  of  Upper  and  Lower  Gali- 
lee (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  hi.  3.  1)  would  naturally  have  suggested  the  adoption  of 
the  former  term  in  reference  to  the  present,  ami  the  latter  in  reference  to  the 
preceding  portion  of  the  sacred  narrative,  if  it  were  not  apparently  an  estab- 
lished  fact  that  Capernaum  belonged,  not,  as  it  might  be  thought,  to  Lower 
(Kitto,  Bibl.  <  if!.  Art.  "Galilee,"'  Vol.  i.  p.  727),  but  to  Upper  Galilee.  Comp. 
Kuscb.  Onamast.  Art  "  Capharnaum,"  and  Smith,  Dk-t.  of  Bible,  Art.  "Galilee," 
Vol.  i  ]).  040.  The  title  above  has  thus  been  ehusen,  though  it  is  confessedly  not 
exact,  as  failing  to  include  the  districts  across  the  .Jordan,  which,  as  will  be  seen 
from  thi'  narrative,  were  the  scenes  of  some  part  of  the  ministry  that  we  are 
DOW  eon.sidering. 


188  THE   MINISTRY  IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

would  appear, yet  blessed  with  his  divine  presence.  Hitherto 

the  plain  of  Gennesareth  and  the  nearer  portions  of  Galilee, 

"the  land  of  Zabulon  and  the  land  of  Neph- 

thalim,"  had   been    almost    exclusively   blest 

with  the  glory  of  the  great  Light;    now    Phcenice   and 

Decapolis  were  to  behold  its  rays.     Hitherto  the  lake  of 

the  east,  "  the  wav  of  the   sea  beyond  Jor- 

1'cr  15. 

dan,"  had  been  the  chief  theatre  of  the  Re- 
deemer's teaching  and  miracles ;  now  even  the  coasts  of 
Tyre  and  Sidon,  and  the  great  sea  of  the  west,  were  to 
hear  the  tidings  of  salvation,  yea,  and  to  bear  their  witness 
to  victories  over  the  powers  of  that  kingdom  of  darkness 
which  had  so  long  been  seated  on  those  heathen  and  idol- 
atrous shores. 

Such  is  the  general  character  of  the  very  remarkable 

portion  of  the  sacred  narrative  on  which  we 
SpecM  contrasts  now  ajJ0ut  to  dwell.     Remarkable  is  it 

and  characteristics. 

for  the  glimpses  it  vouchsafes  to  us  of  the 
unwearied  activities  of  our  Lord's  ministerial  life ;  remark- 
able for  the  notices  it  supplies  to  us  of  the  extended 
spheres  to  which  those  holy  energies  were  directed;1  re- 
markable too  for  the  contrasted  relations  in  which  it  stands 
to  that  portion  of  the  Gospel  history  which  claimed  so 
much  of  our  attention  last  Sunday.  To  these  contrasts 
and  characteristics  let  us  devote  a  few  preliminary  thoughts. 
First,  however,  let  us  specify  the  limits  of  the  section  to 

which  Ave  are  about  to  confine  our  attention. 

Chronological 

limits  of  the  present     These  seem,  almost  at  once,  to  suggest  them- 
selves to  the  meditative  reader,  and  serve  to 
separate  the  evangelical  narrative  into  simple  and  natural 


1  The  peculiar  character  of  these  distant  missionary  journeys  of  our  Lord,  and 
the  considerable  portion  of  time  which  they  appear  to  have  occupied,  have  been 
too  much  overlooked  by  modern  writers  of  the  Life  of  our  Lord.  Compare,  for 
example,  Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §  85.  and  even  to  some  extent  Lange,  Lebeti  Jesu,  n. 
5.  10,  Part  ii.  p.  864,  neither  of  whom  seems  properly  to  recognize  the  important 
place  which  these  journeys  really  occupy  in  our  Lord's  ministry.  See  below,  p. 
189.  Ewald,  on  the  contrary,  has  correctly  devoted  a  separate  section  to  this 
portion  of  the  Gospel  history.    See  Gesch.  Christus\  p.  331  sq. 


Lect.  V.       THE    MINISTRY   IN    NORTHERN    GALILEE.  189 

divisions.  Our  section,  it  will  be  remembered,  commences 
■with  the  events  which  immediately  succeeded  the  feeding 
of  the  five  thousand  on  the  Passover  eve,1  and  naturally 
and  appropriately  concludes  with  the  return  of  our  Lord 
to  Capernaum  a  very  short  time  previous  to  His  journey 
to  Jerusalem  at  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  towards  the  mid- 
dle of  October.  We  have  thus  as  nearly  as  possible  a 
period  of  six  months;2  a  period  bounded  by  two  great 
festivals,  and,  as  I  have  already  said,  marked  off  from  the 
preceding  portion  of  our  Lord's  history  by  some  striking 
contrasts  and  characteristics.  On  these  let  us  briefly  pause 
to  make  a  few  observations  which  the  nature  of  the  subject 
appears  to  demand. 

One  of  the  most  striking  features  of  the  present  section 
is  the  glimpse  it  affords  us  of  the  proc/ressive 

o  I  i  1/  Progrr.**irt'  )itr- 

nature,  if  I  may  venture  to  use  such  an  ex-     tmv  of  our  /..-/•, 

/»  t  ■     •  -ill  t        minUtri/. 

pression,  of  our  Lord  s  ministerial  labors,  and 
the  prophetic  indications,  as  it  were,  which  it  supplies  of 
the  future  universal  diffusion  of  the  Gospel.  At  first  we 
have  seen  that  our  blessed  Master  was  mercifully  pleased 
to  confine  His  teaching  and  His  deeds  of  love  and  mercy 
mainly  to  that  province  which  could  now  alone  be  reck- 
oned as  the  land  of  the  old  theocracy.  In  Juda;a  lie  was 
pleased  to  dwell  continuouslv  more  than  eight 

1  .  John  iv.  1. 

months;"'  in  Judaea  He  gathered  round  Him 

disciples  more  numerous  than  those  of  John,  and  from  Ju- 


1  See  above,  Lect.  iv.  p.  185.  The  opinion  there  advanced,  of  the  exact  coin- 
cidence of  the  day  on  which  the  multitudes  were  fid  with  that  on  which  the 
paschal-lamb  was  slain,  derives  some  slight  support  from  the  subject  of  our 
I. (nd's  discourse  (the  bread  of  life,  John  vi.  22  sq.)  at  Capernaum  on  the  follow- 
ing day,  which,  it  does  not  appear  at  all  unlikely,  was  suggested  by  the  festal 
season.    See  below,  p.  197. 

2  If  we  are  correct  in  our  general  chronology,  the  present  year  would  be  782 
A.l'.c,  and  in  this  year  the  FaSSOver  would  begin  April  IT  or  18  (see  above,  p. 
182,  ii.. te  1),  and  the  least  of  Tabernacles  October  19.  See  the  tables  in  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Synopa.  p.  4S3. 

8  This  ministry  began  with  (he  1'assover  of  the  year  781  A.  u.  c.  (March  29), 
ami  concluded  with  our  Lord's  departure  to  Galilee  through  Samaria,  which,  as 
mi'  have  M'li  above,  may  be  lixed  approximately  ns  late  in  December.  See 
Lect.  in.  p.  128,  note  3. 


190  THE   MINISTRY   IN    NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

dcea  He  departed  only  when  the  malignity  of  Scribe  and 
Pharisee  rendered  that  favored  land  no  longer  a  safe  rest- 
ing-place   for    its    Redeemer    and    its   God. 
Ihen,  and  not  till  then,  followed  the  minis- 
try in  the  eastern  and,  as  it  would  seem,  more  Jndaized 1 
portion    of   Galilee.     In    due    and  mysterious    order   suc- 
ceeded those  missionary  labors  in  frontier  lands  where  the 
Gentile  element  was  mainly,  if  not  in  some  cases  exclu- 
sively, prevalent.    This  gradual  enlargement  of  the  field  of 
holy  labor  does  indeed  seem  both  striking  and  suggestive ; 
this  we  may  perhaps  venture  to  regard  as  a  result  from 
our  present  system  of  harmonizing  the  Gospel  narrative, 
which  reflects  on  that  system  no  small  degree  of  plausibility. 
But  there  are  contrasts  too  between  the  narrative  of  this 
present  portion   of  our   Lord's    history  and 

Contrasts  between        ,  i      .        i  ■    i      1  -it  •  •    i  •  1 

this  and  the  pnced-  that  which  has  preceded,  winch  seem  to  li- 
ft^*™ ^»e  ]ustrate  the  foregoing  remarks,  and  are  in 
themselves  both  interesting  and  instructive. 
Though  the  portion  of  time  vouchsafed  to  the  ministry  in 
Capernaum  and  its  vicinity  was  so  short,  yet  with  what 
minute  accuracy  is  it  detailed  to  us  by  the  three  Synoptical 
Evangelists  !  How  numerous  the  miracles,  how  varied  and 
impressive  the  teaching !     Three  continuous  weeks  only,2 

1  This  last  epithet  may  perils  be  questioned,  but  is  apparently  borne  out  by 
the  essentially  Jewish  chaiacter  of  the  district  which  the  sacred  narrative  seems 
to  reveal.  The  population  of  the  great  city  of  the  district,  Tiberias,  though 
mixed  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2.  3),  appears  to  have  included  a  considerable  and 
probably  preponderant  number  of  Jews,  as  we  find  it  mentioned  as  in  revolt 
against  the  Romans  (Joseph.  Fit.  9),  while  the  other  large  city  of  Galilee,  Sep- 
phoris,  did  not  swerve  from  its  allegiance.  Capernaum  too,  if  we  agree  to 
identify  it  with  Tell  Hfim  (p.  121,  note  1),  must  have  had  a  large  population  of 
Jews  at  a  time  not  very  distant  from  the  Christian  era,  otherwise  we  can  hardly 
account  for  the  extensive  ruins,  apparently  of  a  synagogue  of  unusual  magnifi- 
cence, which  have  been  observed  at  that  place  by  modern  travellers.  See  Rob- 
inson, Palestine,  Vol.  in.  p.  346  (ed.  2),  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Bool:,  Vol. 
i.  p.  540.  As  to  the  supposed  early  date  of  the  building,  compare  the  remarks  of 
Robinson,  Palest.  Vol.  iii.  p.  74. 

2  Assuming  our  general  dates  to  be  right,  our  Lord's  first  appearance  in  the 
synagogue  at  Nazareth  would  be  on  a  Sabbath  corresponding  with  the  twenty- 
first  day  of  the  intercalated  mouth  Beadar,  or,  according  to  the  Julian  Calendar, 
JIarch  20  or  27.  The  Tassovcr,  as  we  have  already  teen,  commenced  on  April 
17  orl8.    We  have  thus  for  the  portion  of  our  Loni's  ministry  on  which  we 


Lect.  V.       THE  MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  191 

yet  in  that  short  time  one  signal  instance  of  the  Lord's 
controlling  power  over  the  elements,1  two  records  of  tri- 
umphs over  the  power  of  death,  three  notable  accounts  of 
a  stern  sovereignty  exercised  over  the  spirits  of  perdition,2 
the  formal  founding  of  the  Church,  and  the  promulgation 
of  all  its  deepest  teaching.  But  in  our  present  section,  when 
we  follow  our  Lord's  steps  into  half-heathen  lands,  though 
the  time  spent  was  so  much  greater,  how  few  the  recorded 
miracles,  how  isolated  and  detached  the  notices  of  them  ! 
Nay,  more,  our  very  inspired    authorities 

»  '  '  '  Teaching    ami 

seem  to  change  their  relations,  and  yet  sug-     preaching    rather 

0  .  •  .  than  miracletchar- 

gest  by  the  very  change  that  local  teaching     aeuristic   of  u,u 
and  preaching,'  rather  than  display  or   mi- 
raculous power,   was  the  chief  characteristic  of  these  six 

liave  commented  in  the  preceding  Lecture  only  a  period  of  about  twenty-two 
days.  It  may  be  Urged  that  this  is  far  shorter  than  we  could  have  inferred  from 
the  narrative;  but  it  may  be  answered,  that  if  the  feast  mentioned  by  St. 
John  (ch.  v.  1)  be  Pnrim,  and  //'we  consider,  as  we  seem  fairly  justified  in  doing, 
the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  coincident  with  the  Passover-eve  of  the  same 
year  (see  p.  117,  note  2),  then  our  Lord's  ministry  in  Eastern  Galilee  cannot 
readily  be  8bown  to  have  lasted  longer  than  has  been  here  supposed.  It  is  by 
no  means  disguised  thai  there  arc  in  this,  as  in  every  other  system  of  chronology 
that  has  yet  been  proposed,  many  difficulties,  and  much  that  may  make  us  very 
doubtful  of  our  power  of  fixing  the  exact  epochs  of  many  o\  ents  (see  above,  p. 
182,  note  1);  still,  if  the  extreme  chronological  limits  appear  rightly  lixed,  we 
seem  bound  to  accept  the  fair  results  of  such  an  arrangement,  if  not  as  certainly 
1 1  in-,  yet  at  least  as  consistent  with  what  has  been  judged  to  be  bo,  and  thus  far 
a>  claiming  our  assent.  l'or  some  remarks  tending  in  some  measure  to  dilute 
the  force  of  a  priori  arguments  Pounded  on  the  apparent  shortness  of  the  time, 
see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Syrups,  p.  288. 

1  We  might  bare  almost  said  tim,  as  the  miracle  of  walking  on  the  water 
(Matt.  xiv.  2'2,  Mark  vi.  48,  John  vi.  19),  though  placed  in  the  portion  on  which 
WO  are  now  commenting,  obviously  belongs  to  the  ministry  in  Eastern  Galilee. 

-'  These  are,  (1)  the  striking  instance  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum  (Mark  i. 
23  sq.,  Luke  iv. :»  gq.),  which  so  greatly  amazed  those  who  vi  itnessed  it;  (2)  the 
instance  of  healing  the  blind  and  deaf  demoniac  (Matt.  xii.  22),  which  provoked 
the  impious  declarations  of  the  Jerusalem  scribes  and  Pharisees;  and  (8)  the 
Gergesene  demoniacs  (Matt.  viii.  28  Sq.,  Mark  v.  i.  Bq:,  Luke  viii.  26  si].). 

8  The  Btateraeni  of  Chrysostom  (in  Matt.  Horn,  i.n  Vol.  vii.  p.  59G,  ed.  Bened. 
21.  that  our  Lord  did  not  journey  1o  the  borders  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  for  the  pur- 
po-e  of  preaching  there  (ou5e  cLs  xr/pv^wy  a,Tr'ii\d(V),  seems  doubtful,  from  Si. 
Mark,  a.-  ChrySOStom  urges,  we  learn  that  our  Lord  BOUght  privacy  ••  and  would 

have  no  man  know"  (ch.  vii.  24),  bui  this,  from  the  immediate  context,  and,  as 

it  were,  ("intra- i'ii  miracle,  would  seem  to  indicate  a  desire  for  partial  rather 
than  ab  ..'ale  concealment;  a  temporary  laying  aside  of  Bis  merciful  displays 
of  divine  power,  rather  than  a  suspension  of  His  ministry. 


192  THE   MINISTRY  IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.      Lect.  V. 

months  of  the  Lord's  ministerial  life.  I  ground  this  opin- 
ion on  the  easily  verified  fact  that  the  professed  histo- 
rian of  his  Master's  life,  he  who  made  it  his  duty  to  set  in 
order  the  narrative  which  eye-witnesses  had  delivered, 
and  who  records  to  us  events  rather  than 

Luke  i.  2.  .     ,  .  ,  ...  ,      , 

discourses,  has  assigned  to  this  six  months 
period  only  some  thirty  or  more  verses,2  while  to  the  brief 
but  eventful  period  that  preceded  he  has  devoted  at  least 
seven  times  as  much  of  his  inspired  record.  Our  principal 
authority,  as  we  might  almost  expect,  is  St.  Matthew;  yet 
not  exclusively,  as  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  verses  of 
St.  Mark's  Gospel  relate  to  the  same  period.3  The  events 
however  recorded  by  both  Evangelists  taken  together  are 
so  very  few,  that  again  the  inference  would  seem  reason- 
able, that  if  two  of  those  who  were  eye-witnesses  —  for  in 
St.  Mark  we  have  the  testimony  of  St.  Peter  —  have 
related  so  little,  our  Lord's  miracles  during  this  time  could 
scarcely  have  been  numerous.  Miracles,  as  we  know,  were 
performed,  but  it  was  probably  less  by  their  influence  than 
by  the  calm  but  persuasive  influence  of  teaching  and 
preaching  that  the  Lord  was  pleased  to  touch  and  test  the 
rude  yet  apparently  receptive  hearts  of  the  dwellers  in  the 
remote  uplands  of  Galilee,  or  in  the  borders  of  Hellenic 
Decapolis.4 

l  On  (he  nature  and  characteristics  of  this  Gospel,  see  Lect.  i.  p.  41  sq. 

-  The  only  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  which  appears  to  relate  to  this  period 
of  our  Lord's  ministry,  if  we  except  a  very  few  verses  which  may  perhaps  belong 
to  discourses  during  this  period  (ch.  xv.  3—7,  xvii.  1,  3),  begins  ch.  ix.  18,  and 
concludes  with  the  fiftieth  verse  of  the  same  chapter.  Comp.  Wieseler,  Citron. 
Synops.  p.  311. 

3  The  portion  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel  that  refers  to  this  period  of  our  Lord's 
ministry  begins  ch.  vi.  45,  and  seems  to  conclude  with  the  last  verse  of  ch.  ix. 
The  next  chapter  describes  our  Lord  as  journeying  into  Judaea  by  way  of  Feraea, 
and,  consequently,  is  describing  the  last  journey  to  Jerusalem.     See  Lect.  VI. 

4  The  district,  or,  more  strictly  speaking,  confederation  bearing  this  name, 
seems  to  have  been  made  up  of  cities  and  villages  round  them  (Joseph.  Fit.  § 
65),  of  which  the  population  was  nearly  entirely  Gentile;  two  of  the  cities,  Hip- 
pos and  Gadara,  are  distinctly  termed  by  Josephus  (Antiq,  XII.  11.  4)  'EAATjWSey 
ttoAcis.  The  geographical  limits  of  Decapolis  can  scarcely  be  denned;  we 
semi,  however,  justified  in  considering  that  nearly  all  the  cities  included  in  the 
confederation  were  across  the  Jordan,  and  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  lake  of 
Gennesaretb.  Compare  Eusebius,  Onomast.  s.  v.  "Decapolis,"  and  see  Winer, 
RWB.  Art.  "  Decapolis,"  Vol.  i.  p.  263. 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  193 

This  is  exactly  what  we  might  have  presumed  to  expect 
from  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  from  .    J  _ 

Such  a  difference 

what  has  been  incidentally  revealed  to  us  of    probable  from  the 

nature  of  the  case. 

the  conditions  on  which  the  performance  of 
the  Lord's  miracles  in  a  great  measure  depended.     From 
the  comment  which  both   St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Mark   have   made    upon    the   repressing       jtpiw. 
influence  of  the  unbelief  of  the  people   of 
Nazareth,  we  seem  justified  in  asserting  that  our  Redeem- 
er's miracles  were  in   a  great  degree  contingent  upon  the 
faith  of  those  to  whom  the  message  of  the  Gospel  was 
offered.1     How  persuasively  true  then  does  that  narrative 
appear  which  on  the  one  hand  represents  the  appeal  to 
miracles  most  frequent  and  continuous  in  Eastern  Galilee, 
where   the    receptivity  was   great  and   the   contravening 
influences  mainly  due  to  alien  emissaries,3 — and,  on  the 
other,  leaves  us  to   infer,  by  its  few  and  isolated  notices, 
that  amid  the  darkness  and  necessarily  imperfect  belief  of 
the  frontier  lands  that  appeal  was  comparatively  limited 
and  exceptional. 

But  it  is  now  time  for  us  to  resume  the  thread  of  the 
inspired  history.     On  that  Passover-eve  with 

l_  •*  The  return  across 

which  our  narrative   commences,  our  Lord,     the  lake,  our  Lord 

.  .  walks  on  the  waters. 

alter  having  ted  the  live  thousand,  remains 
Himself  behind  on  the  eastern  shore  to  dis- 
miss the  yet  lingering  multitudes,  but  directs 

->  O  &  '  Mark  vi.  45. 

the  disciples  to  cross  over  the  lake  to  Beth- 

saida.     From  some    supposed    discordant   notices   in   the 


1  The  following  comment  of  Origan  is  clear  and  pertinent:  "  From  these  words 
(Matt.  xiij.  68)  we  are  taught  that  miracles  were  performed  among  the  believing, 
Bince  'to  every  one  that  hath  it  shall  be  given  and  shall  be  made  to  abound,' 
but  aiming  unbelievers  miracles  not  only  were  not,  but,  as  St.  Mark  has  recorded, 
•  ..  n  could  not  be  performed.  For  attend  to  that  '  He  could  not  perform  any 
miracle  there;'  he  <li'l  not  say  '  lie  would  not,"  but  '  lie  could  not,'  implying 
that  there  is  an  accessory  cooperation  with  the  miraculous  power  supplied  by 
the  faith  of  Him  towards  whom  the  miracle  is  being  performed,  but  that  there  is 
a  positive  binderanoe  caused  by  unbelief. " — In  Matt.  x.  18,  Vol.  iii.  p.  46G  (ed. 
r  ned.).    See  also  Euthym.  Mat t .  xiii.  58. 

I  Bee  above,  I.ect.  IV,  p,  102,  note  1. 

17 


194  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

accounts  given  of  the  circumstances  which  followed,  it  has 
been  urged  that  this  Bethsaida  was  the  town  of  that 
name,  known  also  by  the  name  of  Julias,  not  far  from  the 
head  of  the  lake,1  and  with  this  supposition  it  may  be  con- 
ceded that  there  are  some  statements  in  the  sacred  narra- 
tive that  at  first  sight  seem  to  be  fairly  accordant :  as,  how- 
ever, the  supposed  discordances  and  difficulties  are  really 
only  imaginary,  there  seems  no  sufficient  reason  for  depart- 
ing from  the  ordinarily  received  opinion  that  this  was  the 
village  on  the  western  side.  Nay,  more,  the  scarcely 
doubtful  direction  of  the  gale  from  the  south-west,2  which 
would  brincr,  as  we  are  afterwards  told,  ves- 

John  vi.  23.  7         • 

sels  from  Tiberias  to  the  north-eastern  coast, 
but  would  greatly  delay  a  passage  in  the  contrary  direc- 
tion, seems  to  make  against  such  a  supposition,  and  to  lead 
us  decidedly  to  believe  that  Bethsaida  on  the  western  coast 
was  the  point  which  the  Apostles  were  trying  to  reach, 

1  This  view,  which  is  perhaps  originally  due  to  Lightfoot  (Citron.  Temp.  §  47, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  30,  Roterod.  1686),  is  very  elaborately  maintained  by  Wieseler  {Citron. 
Synops.  p.  274,  note),  and  has  also  found  a  recent  advocate  in  Dr.  Thomson  ( The 
Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  30  sq.),  who  conceives  that  there  was  really 
only  one  Bethsaida,  viz.  the  town  at  the  northeastern  corner  of  the  lake.  In 
opposition  to  Lightfoot  and  Wieseler,  we  may  justly  urge,  first,  the  distinct 
words  of  St.  Matthew,  describing  the  position  of  the  vessel  on  its  return,  to  5e 
irKoiou  7]  5  7j  fxeaov  ttjs  8ia\a.<rcrns  fy  (ch.  xiv.  24;  comp.  Mark  vi.  47);  and, 
secondly,  the  words  of  St.  Mark,  irpoayeiv  els  to  iripav  Trpbs  fi-n&ffaib'di' 
(ch.  vi.  45),  which,  when  coupled  with  the  above  notice  of  the  position  of  the 
vessel,  it  does  seem  impossible  to  explain  otherwise  than  as  specifying  a  direct 
course  across  the  lake.  Compare  also  John  vi.  17.  With  regard  to  Dr.  Thom- 
son's opinion,  it  may  be  observed  that  all  modern  writers  seem  rightly  to  acqui- 
esce in  the  opinion  of  Reland  that  there  was  a  place  of  that  name  on  the  west- 
ern coast,  very  near  Capernaum.  Robinson  fixes  its  site  as  at  the  modern 
et-Tabighah  (Palestine,  Vol.  in.  p.  359,  ed.  2),  but  there  seems  good  reason  for 
agreeing  with  Ritter  in  placing  it  at  Khan  Minyeh,  and  in  fully  admitting  the 
statement  of  Seetzen,  that  this  last-mentioned  place  was  also  known  by  the  local 
name  of  Bat-Szaida.  See  Erdlnmde,  Tart  xv.  p.  333  sq.  That  there  should  be 
two  places  called  Bethsaida  ("  House  of  Fish")  on  or  near  a  lake  so  well  known, 
not  only  for  the  peculiar  varieties  (Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  in.  10.  8),  but  the  great 
abundance  of  its  fish,  as  that  of  Gennesareth,  cannot  justly  be  considered  at  all 
improbable. 

2  See  Blunt,  Veracity  of  Evangelists,  No.  xx.  p.  82,  who  appears  rightly  to 
connect  with  the  mention  of  the  gale  the  incidental  notice  of  the  passage  of 
boats  from  Tiberias  to  the  N.  E.  corner  of  the  lake.  For  a  description  of  these 
sudden  and  often  lasting  gales,  see  Thomson,  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  32, 
and  comp.  p.  177,  note  2. 


Lect.  V.        THE    MINISTRY    IN    NORTHERN    GALILEE.  195 

and  trying  to  reach  in  vain.  Though  they  had  started  in 
the  evening,1  they  had  not  crossed  the  lake  by  the  time  of 
the   fourth    watch ;    still    were   they    toiling 

,...-,  -,     "  Matt.  xiv.  25. 

against  the  stirred-up  waters  and  tempestu-        „  ,   . 

°  _  l  Murk  vi.  48. 

ous  wind,  when  to  their  bewilderment  they 

see  the  Lord  walking  on  those  storm-tossed  waves,  and,  as  it 

were,  leading  the  way2  to  the  haven  they  had  so  long  heen 

striving  to  reach.     "We  well  remember  the  incident  of  the 

Striking  but,  alas,  soon  failing   faith    of  St. 

Peter,   the   ceasing   of   the   wind,   and    the         a"-xiv-    *<i- 

°  John  vi.  21. 

speedy    arrival    of   the    vessel    at    the   land 
whither  they  were  going;  and  we  have, perhaps, not  forgot- 
ten that  this  miracle  produced  a  greater  impression  on  the 
Apostles  than  any  they  had  yet  witnessed.3     The  miracle 
of  the  multiplied  loaves  they  could  not  fully  appreciate. 


1  Some  little  difficulty  has  been  found  in  the  specifications  of  time  in  tlie  nar- 
.  owing  to  the  inclusive  nature  of  the  term  6i|/i'a.  The  following  remarks 
will  perhaps  adjust  the  seeming  discrepancies.  From  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xiv.  16) 
WC  learn  that  it  was  oifi'a  before  the  men  sat  down.  This  we  may  reasonably 
suppose  roughly  specifies  sometime  in  the  first  evening  (3  p.  m. — 6  p.m.),  which 
again  the  &pa.  TroAA)/  of  St.  Mark  (ch.  vi.  35)  would  seem  more  nearly  to  define 
as  rather  towards  the  close  than  the  commencement  of  that  otyia.  At  the  begin- 
ning of  the  second  evening,  probably  soon  after  six  o'clock,  the  disciples  embark 
(John  vi.  16),  and  ere  this  btyia,  which  extended  from  sunset  to  darkness,  had 
quite  concluded,  the  disciples  had  reached  the  middle  of  the  lake  (Mark  vi.  47; 
Oomp.  Matt.  xiv.  24),  and  were  now  experiencing  the  full  force  of  a  gale,  which, 
jm  obably  commencing  soon  after  sunset  (compare  Thomson,  Lmitt  and  the  Hook, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  32),  was  now  becoming  hourly  mote  wild.  For  some  hours  they  con- 
tend against  it,  but  without  making  more  than  a  few  stadia  (oomp.  John  vi.  19; 
the  lake  was  about  forty  stadia  broad;  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  in.  10.  7),  when,  in 
the  fourth  watch  (Matt.  xiv.  25),  they  beheld  our  Lord  walking  on  the  waters, 
and  approaching  the  vessel.  On  the  first  and  second  evenings  see  (jeseuius,  Lex. 
s.  v   -"."',  p.  dci.ii.  (Bagster),  Jahn,  drchaol.  Ilib/.  §  101. 

-  See  Mark  vi.  48,  i(al  ^ieAsj/  irapej&uv  alnovs;  and  compare  Lauge,  Leben 
Jem,  ii.  5.  3,  Part  n.  p.  788. 

■"•  ( in  this  miracle,  which  is  one  of  the  seven  selected  by  St.  John  (comp.  Ewald, 
Qeach.  Chrisms',  p.  858,  note),  and  which,  as  the  Greek  commentators  rightly 
observe  (see  ChrysOSt.  and  Euthymius  in  Matt.  xiv.  33),  evinces  even  more  dis- 
tinctly than  the  stilling  of  the  tempest  our  Lord's  power  over  the  laws  that, 
govern  the  material  world,— see  some  novel,  though  too  allegorically  applied 
oomments  in  Origen,  in  Watt.  vi. ',,  Vol.  hi.  p.  484  sq.  (ed.  Bened.),  and  in  Augus- 
tiue,  8*  mi.  i.xxv.  i.x.wi.  Vol.  v.  p.  471  sq.  .More  general  comments  will  be 
found  in  Hall.  Ci.ni,  m,,/.  iv.  6,  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  '274  sq.;  and  notices  of  diffi- 
culties in  this  and  the  accompanying  narrative,  in  Kbrard,  Kriltk  tier Evang. 
(..  srliichtc,  f  70,  p.  3Jl. 


196  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

Though,  as  we  well  know,  it  had  produced   a  profound 

effect  upon  those  for  whose  sake  it  had  heen 

°      '   *         performed,  and  had  caused  them  to  confess 

Ver.  14.  *  ' 

that  this  was  "of  a  truth  that  prophet  that 
should  come  into  the  world,"  and  though  we  cannot  doubt 
that  in  such   a  confession  the  Apostles  had  also  silently 

shared,  yet  we  are  plainly  told  by  the   sec- 

Ch.  ft.  52.  i      T-i  l  ■  i-i 

ond  .bvangehst  that  their  hearts  were  too 
hard  and  too  dull  to  understand  fully  the  mighty  miracle 
at  which  they  themselves  had  been  permitted  to  minister. 
Here,  however,  was  something  that  produced  on  them  a 
far  deeper  impression  ;  here  was  something  that  appealed 
to  those  hardy  boatmen  as  nought  else  could  have  ap- 
pealed, and  made  them,  both  with  their  lips  and  by  their 

outward  and  unforbidden  posture  of  worship, 

Matt.  xiv.  33.  '  .  ,  . 

avow, for  the  first  time  collectively,  that  their 

Master  was  what  one  of  them  had  long  since  separately 

declared  Him  to  be,  not  only  "the  king  of 

John  ' 49'  Israel,"  but  "  the  Son  of  God." 1 

Re*™  to  caper-         The  morninSr  brines  back  to  the  western 

naum ;   our  Lords  *->  ° 

discourse    in   the     s\c}e  many2  of  those  who  had  been  miracu- 

sitnayogue* 

lously  fed  the  evening  before,  and  to  them, 
in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum  (for  it  was  the  fifteenth 
of  Nisan  and  a  day  of  solemn  service3),  the  Lord  utters 

1  On  the  full  signification  of  the  title  "Son  of  God,"  as  applied  to  our  Lord 
in  the  New  Testament,  see  the  valuable  remarks  of  Wilton,  Iliu.it  r.  of  the  New 
Test.  ch.  ii.  p.  10  sq.  In  the  present  case  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  it  was 
aught  else  than  a  full  and  complete  recognition,  not  merely  of  our  Saviour's 
Messiahship  (Meyer),  which  would  here  be  wholly  out  of  place,  but  of  His 
divine  nature  and  prerogatives. 

2  Unnecessary  difficulties  have  been  made  about  the  transit  of  the  multitude. 
Without  unduly  pressing  6  earr^Kcis  (Stier),  as  specially  implying  those  who 
remained,  in  contrast  with  those  that  went  away,  it  still  seems  obvious  from  the 
tenor  of  the  narrative  that  those  who  followed  our  Lord  were  only  the  more 
earnest  and  deeply  impressed  portion  of  the  multitude.  Boats  they  would  find 
in  abundance,  as  the  traffic  on  the  lake  was  great,  and  the  gale  would  have 
driven  boats  in  a  direction  from  Tiberias,  and  obliged  them  to  sock  shelter  on 
the  northeastern  shore.  See  above,  p.  194,  note  2,  and  compare  Sepp,  Lebcn 
Christi,  v.  7,  Vol.  iii.  16. 

8  See  Lev.  xxiii.  7,  Deut.  xxviii.  18,  from  both  of  which  passages  we  learn 
that  there  was  to  be  a  holy  convocation  on  the  day,  and  no  servile  work  done 
thereon. 


I.ixt.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  197 

that  sublime  discourse  recorded  by  St.  John,  so  strik- 
ingly in  accordance  not  only  with  the  past  miracle  but 
with  the  present  Passover-season,  wherein  He  declares 
Himself  to  be  the  Bread  of  Life.  The  whole  discourse  is 
worthy  of  our  attention,1  as  serving  to  confirm,  perhaps 
in  a  somewhat  striking  way,  some  of  the  views  which  we 
were  led  to  adopt  last  Sunday  in  regard  to  the  spiritual 
state  of  the  people  of  Capernaum  and  its  neighborhood. 
It  seemed  almost  clear,  you  may  remember,  that  the  hos- 
tility and  unbelief  which  the  Lord  met  with  at  Capernaum 
were  in  a  great  degree  to  be  traced  to  malignant  emissa- 
ries from  Jerusalem,  subsequently  joined  by 
some  Galilfean  Pharisees.2   We  may  reasona-     „Lvke. v- 17; comp- 

J  Mark  m.  22. 

bly  conceive  that  these  evil  men  had  now 
left  Galilee  to  celebrate  the  Passover,  and  we  may  in  con- 
sequence be  led  to  expect  far  fewer  exhibitions  of  hatred 
and  hostility  when  our  Lord  vouchsafes  to  preach  in  the 
synagogue  from  which  they  were  temporarily  absent. 
And  this  is  exactly  what  we  do  find  recorded  by  the 
fourth  Evangelist.  We  detect  traces  of  doubt  and  sus- 
pended   belief  in   some   of  the    assembled 

,  -,  John  «*  30. 

hearers,  nay,  we  are  told  of  murmunngs 
from  the  more  hostile  section  then  present,3 
when  our  Lord  declares  that  He  Himself 
was  "  the  bread  which  came  down  from 
heaven;"  we  observe,  too,  strivings  among  themselves  as 


1  For  good  and  copious  comments  on  this  discourse,  the  subject  of  which  is 
the  mysterious  relation  of  our  Lord  to  His  people  as  the  Bread  of  Life,  and  as 
the  spiritual  sustenance  of  believers,  see  Chrysostom,  in  Joann.  Horn.  xliv. 
—xi. vit.,  Cyril  Alex,  in  Joann.  Vol.  iv.  pp.  295—372  (ed.  Aubert),  Augustine,  in 
Joann.  Tractat.  xxv.  xxvi.,  and  among  modern  writers  in  Luthardt,  das  Johann. 
Evan;;.  1'art  n.  pp.  49—64,  and  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  v.  pp.  149—205 
(Clark). 

2  See  above,  p.  162,  note  1. 

3  It  deserves  notice  that  the  speakers  are  now  not,  as  above,  some  of  the  mul- 
titude who  had  followed  our  Lord,  and  whose  questions  had  received  the  solemn 
answers  recorded  in  the  earlier  portion  of  the  discourse,  but  arc  specially  noticed 
as  'lovScuot ;  i.  e.,  according  to  what  seems  St.  .John's  regular  use  of  the  term, 
adherents  of  the  party  that  was  specially  hostile  to  our  Lord.  See  above,  p.  137, 
note  3 

17* 


Fer.41. 
Ver.  52. 


198  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.       Ljcct.  V. 

to  the  true  meaning  of  His  weighty  words;1  but  we  are 
shocked  by  none  of  those  outbursts  of  maddened  hatred 

which  on  an  earlier  occasion  marked  the 
jukevi.ii;comp.     presence  0f  tbe   intruders   from   Jerusalem. 

It  is  clear,  however,  that  evil  seed  had  been 
sown  and  was  springing  up ;  it  is  plain  that  our  Lord's 
words  caused  offence,  and  that  not  merely  to  the  general 
multitude,  but,  alas,  to  some   unspiritual    disciples,  who, 

St.  John  tells  us  shortly  but  sadly,  "  went 

back,  and  walked  with  Him  no  more."  But 
the  holy  Twelve  were  true  and  firm:  they  who  a  few 
hours  before,  on  the  dark  waters  of  the  solitary  lake,  had 

confessed  their  Master's  divinity,  now  again, 
johivt^'        m  tne  face  °f  au  men>  declare  by  the  mouth 

of  St.  Peter2  that  they  believed  and  were 
sure  that  "  He  Vas  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God." 

1  These  strivings,  though  in  a  different  and  better  spirit,  have  continued  to  this 
very  day.  Without  entering  deeply  into  the  contested  question  of  the  reference  of 
the  words  Kal  6  &pTos,  k.  t.  A.  ( ver.  51),  we  may  remark  generally  (1)  that  the  allu- 
sion in  ver.  50  is  clearly  to  the  Incarnation,  which  at  the  commencement  of  ver.  51 
is  more  fully  unfolded,  and  in  the  conclusion  of  that  verse  seems  also  further 
(Kal  6  apTos  8e,  k.  t.  A.)  followed  out  to  its  last  most  gracious  purpose, — the 
giving  up  of  the  human  flesh  thus  assumed  to  atone  for  the  sins  of  mankind : 
cnro&vr)(rKa>  (p-qtriv,  virep  tmtwv,  'iva  iravras  faoiroiricrw  St'  ifxavrov,  Cyril 
Alex,  in  loc.  Vol.  iv.  p.  353.  This  supposition,  thus  derived  from  the  context,  is 
strongly  confirmed  by  the  word  <rap|,  which,  especially  in  its  present  connec- 
tion, seems  intended  still  more  definitely  to  point  to  our  Lord's  atoning  death. 
Compare  Eph.  ii.  15,  Col.  i.  22, 1  Pet.  iii.  18.  To  which  we  may  add  (2)  that  the 
idea  pervading  the  whole  verse,  —  Christ  the  bread  of  the  world,  and  the  further 
explanations  which  our  Lord  Himself  vouchsafes  (ver.  53),  fully  warrant  a 
reference,  not  directly  and  exclusively,  but  indirectly  and  inclusively,  to  the 
Holy  Communion  of  our  Lord's  body  and  blood.  For  an  account  of  the  vari- 
ous conflicting  views,  see  Liicke,  Comment.  Tiber  Joh.  Vol.  ii.  p.  152  sq.  (ed.  3), 
Meyer,  ib.  p.  209  (ed.  3);  but  to  ascertain  the  exact  opinion  of  the  patristic 
writers  there  referred  to,  the  student  will  be  wise  to  consult  the  original  writers. 

2  This  confession  of  St.  Peter,  which,  as  Chrysostom  rightly  remarks,  was  said 
in  behalf  of  all  (ov  yap  eltreu  "  tyvuiKa,"  &\A'  "  eyvwKanei/"),  is  certainly  not 
to  be  regarded  as  identical  with  that  recorded  in  Matt.  xvi.  16:  contrast  Wiese- 
ler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  277.  Time,  place,  and  circumstances  seem  so  clearly  dif- 
ferent that  we  can  hardly  fail  to  admit,  what  is  in  itself  highly  natural,  that  the 
fervid  apostle  twice  made  a  similar  confession.  Such  seems  distinctly  the 
opinion  of  Chrysostom  (in  loc),  who  alludes  to  the  other  confession  as  aWaxov. 
The  exact  words  of  the  confession  are  not  perfectly  certain.  We  have  followed 
above  the  Received  Text,  but  as  there  seems  some  probability  of  alteration  from 
Matt.  xvi.  16  (see  Meyer  and  Alford  in  loc.)  it  may  be  fairly  questioned  whether 
the  reading  of  Pt'iDL,  6  ayios  tov  0eoD,  is  not  to  be  preferred. 


//-  aUnga  in  Opn- 
nesareth.    and   re- 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY    IN    NORTHERN   GALILEE.  199 

Of  the   miraculous   events   that    immediately  followed 
we   can  only  speak  in  general  terms.     Both 
St.   Matthew  and    St.  Mark  here    expressly 
mention     numerous    healings     which    were     tur"  "'" ."'e  JewUh 
performed     in     the     plain    of    Gennesareth. 
Both    speak    of  the    great    confluence    of   the    sick    and 
the   suffering ;  both    specify  the    mightiness 
of  the  power  with  which  they  were  healed.       MarkvLss. 
To  the  performance  of  these  deeds  of  mercy       x<*t.  xtv.  sa. 

.  F.  /•  n  i  Mark  vi.  56. 

a  short  time — a  few  days  perhaps  —  may 
reasonably  be  assigned;1  but  it  was  a  short  time  only. 
Those  healing  hands  were,  alas,  soon  to  be  stayed.  Old 
enemies  were  by  this  time  on  their  way  back  again  to 
bring  charges  and  to  condemn;  the  human  agents  of  the 
kingdom  of  darkness  were  again  arraying  themselves 
against  the  Lord  of  the  kingdom  of  light. 

Ch  xv  1 

St.  Matthew  and   St.  Mark  both   relate   the  '"..',' 

Ch.  pit,  1. 

arrival  of  Scribes  and  Pharisees  from  Jeru- 
salem,2—  beyond  all  doubt  those  whose  machinations  we 
noticed  in  our  last  lecture,  and  who  now,  with  the  true 
spirit  of  the  sect  to  which  they  belonged,  had  formally 
observed  their  Passover  at  Jerusalem,  and  had  hastened 
back,  as  it  were   from  the  presence  of  the  God  of  justice 


1  In  the  narrative  of  St.  Matthew  there  is  nothing  to  guide  us.  The  remark, 
however,  of  St.  Mark,  birou  av  tiamoptvtro  sis  Kiv/xas  v)  els  7rci\eij  7)  els  ixypovs 
[oh,  \i.  5G),  seems  to  Indicate  a  continued  ministry  in  the  neighborhood  of  Caper- 
naum, of  at  least  a  few  days'  duration.  Wicseler  (Citron.  Si/)io]>s.  p.  311,  note) 
Beemsto  refer  not  only  all  these  events,  but  also  the  reply  of  our  Lord  to  the 
Pharisees  on  the  subject  of  eating  with  unwashen  hands  (Matt.  xv.  1  sq.,  Mark 
vii.  1  sq.),  to  the  same  day  as  that  on  which  the  discourse  on  the  Bread  of  Life 
was  delivered,  i.  e.  on  Nisan  15.  This,  however,  is  by  no  means  probable.  The 
Pharisees  and  Scribes,  who  are  specified  both  by  the  first  and  second  Evangelists 
as  having  come  from  Jerusalem,  would  hardly  have  left  the  city  till  the  festival 
of  the  Passover  was  fully  concluded.  Origen  (in  Matt.  Tom.  XI.  8)  comments 
on  the  T<$re  (Matt.  xv.  1)  as  marking  a  general  coincidence  in  point  of  time 
with  the  healings  in  Gennesareth,  but  gives  no  precise  opinion  as  to  the  exact 
Ume  when  the  emissaries  reappeared. 

I  Chrysostom  [in  Matt.  xv.  1)  has  noticed  the  special  mention  of  the  place 
whence  they  had  come,  remarking  that  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  from  the 
capital  were  both  actuated  by  a  worse  spirit  and  held  more  in  repute  than  those 
from  other  parts  of  Judsa.  Horn.  Li.  Vol.  vil.  p.  583  (ud.  Bened,  2).  See 
l.ulli;.  mius,  im  loc.  Vo!.  i.  | 


200  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

and  truth,  to  take  counsel  against  innocent  blood.  Ground 
of  accusation  is  soon  found  out.  These  base  men  had 
perhaps  insidiously  crept  into  the  social  meetings  of  the 
disciples,  and  marked  with  malignant  eyes  the  freedom  of 
early  evangelical  life,  and  the  charge  is  soon  made  :  "Why 
walk  not  thy  disciples  according  to  the  tradition  of  the 
elders,  but  eat  bread  with  unwashen  hands?" 

Matt.  xv.  2.  £~,  -.  ,   .  .--. 

Markrii.5.         btern   and   crushing   indeed   is   the    answer 
„  .  .. .  which  is  returned,  startling  the   application 

Mark  vii.  6.  ~  L  1 

of  prophecy,   plain    the    principle,   declared 
openly  and  plainly  to  the  throng  of  bystanders,1  that  de- 
filement is  not  from  without,  but  from  within. 

Matt.  xv.  11.  .  . 

Complete  indeed  was  the   vindication,  but 

dangerous  in   its   very  completeness.      The   Pharisees,  as 

we  learn   incidentally,  were  now  still  more 

Ver.  12.  . 

deeply  offended ;  their  malevolence  was  as- 
suming hourly  a  more  implacable  form,  and,  not  improba- 
bly, hourly  becoming  more  and  more  contagious.  Doubts, 
suspicion,  and  perhaps  aversion,2  were  now  not  improbably 
fast  springing  up  in  the  minds  even  of  those 
who  once  would  fain  have  prevented  the 
Lord  from  ever  leaving  their  highly-favored  land.  Nor 
was  this  all.  Other  evil  influences  were  at  work,  not  only 
among  the  people,  but  among  their  rulers ;  for  we  may 

1  Both  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  notice  the  fact  that  our  Lord  called  the 
mixed  multitude  round  Him  (Matt.  xvi.  10,  Ka\  irpocTKaKeadixivos  rov  v%^ov. 
Comp.  Mark  vii.  14)  and  declared  more  especially  to  them  (rptTrti  Tbv  \6yov 
irpbs  t)jv  o%Aoy  ws  a^ioKoyc&Tepoi',  Euthym.)  the  principle,  which  the  Pharisees 
would  have  been  slow  to  admit,  that  defilement  was  from  within,  and  not  from 
without.  It  would  seem,  however,  that  this  was  uttered  in  the  hearing  of  the 
Pharisees,  and  that,  as  Euthymius  rightly  suggests,  this  was  the  \6yos  (Matt. 
xv.  12)  at  which,  both  from  its  sentiment  and  the  publicity  given  to  it,  the  Phar- 
isees were  so  much  offended.    Comp.  Meyer,  in  loc.  p.  306  (ed.  4). 

2  This  seems  in  some  measure  to  transpire  in  St.  John's  account  of  our  Lord's 
recent  preaching  at  Capernaum,  especially  in  those  expressions  of  thorough 
Nazarene  unbelief  (Luke  iv.  22,  Mark  vi.  3)  which  followed  our  Lord's  declara- 
tion that  He  was  the  "  Bread  which  came  down  from  heaven  "  (John  vi.  41  sq.). 
Though  it  is  right  to  remember  that  these  expressions  came  from  a  hostile  sec- 
tion (see  above,  p.  197,  note  3),  yet  the  very  presence  of  such  a  section  in  a  syna- 
gogue where  a  very  short  time  before  the  only  feeling  was  amazement  (Mark  i. 
22,  Luke  iv.  32),  seems  to  show  that  some  change  of  feeling  was  beginning  decid- 
edly to  show  itself. 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN    NORTHERN   GALILEE.  201 

remember  that  it  was  but  a  short  time  before  that  the 
evil  and  superstitious  Herod  Antipas1  had 

'  .  r  Lukcix.9. 

evinced  a  strong  desire  to  see  One  of  whom 
he  had  heard  tidings  that  filled  him  with  uneasiness  and 
perplexity.     And   such  a  desire  on  the  part 
of  the  murderer  of  the  Baptist,  we  may  well 
infer,  could  bode  nothing  but  ill  against  One  whom  his 
fears  had  made  him  believe   was  his  victim  come  back 
again  from  the  grave.2     All  the  Lord's  secret  or  avowed 
enemies   thus   seemed    unconsciously    working   together; 
danger  was  on  every  side,  and  eastern  Galilee  was  proba- 
bly fast  becoming  as  unsafe  an  abode  for  the  Redeemer 
ami  His  Apostles  as  JiuUea  had  been  a  few  months  before. 
However  this  may  be,  the  blessing  of  the  Lord's  pres- 
ence  was    now  to   be   vouchsafed    to    other 

.  Journey  In    Tyre 

lands,     in  the  remote  west  and  in  the  con-     andsuion,andthe 

n  t       c    m  j.i        t        i  i  i       miracle  per/urmcJ 

lines'  or    lyre  the  Lord   was    now  pleased     there. 
to  seek,  if  not  for  a  security  that  was  denied 

.  .  Mark  vii.  24. 

at  Capernaum,  yet  lor  a  seclusion  that  might 

have    been    needed   for  a  yet    further   instruction   of  the 


i  What  little  we  know  of  the  character  of  this  Tetrarch  is  chiefly  derived  from 
what  is  recorded  of  him  in  the  Gospels,  especially  in  that  of  St.  Luke.  Josephus 
notices  chiefly  his  love  of  ease  and  expense  {An/it/,  xviii.  7.  1  sq.),  but  in  the 
sacred  writers,  beside  the  mention  of  his  adultery  and  murder  of  the  Baptist, 
we  also  lind  allusions  that  prove  him  to  have  been  a  thoroughly  bad  man.  Com- 
pare  Luke  iii.  19.  and  Nolde,  Historia  Iilum.  p.  251  sq. 

^  In  the  account  given  by  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists  (Matt,  xiv.  1  sq., 
Mark  vi.  11  sq.,  Luke  ix.  7  sq.)  we  have  the  workings  of  a  bad  conscience  plainly 
Bet  before  as.  Observe  the  emphatic  lf&  (Luke  ix.  9),  and  the  desire  expressed 
ti>  -ic  our  Lord  so  as  to  satisfy  himself  that  the  general  opinion  (Luke  ix.  7),  in 
which  he  himself  Beems  to  have  shared  (Matt.  xiv.  2,  Mark  vi.  10;  comp.  Chrys. 
in  Matt.  I.  <•.),  was  not  true  after  all.  There  seems  no  reason  for  ascribing  to  the 
Tetrarch  a  belief  in  any  form  of  transmigration  of  souls  (comp.  Grotius  in  loc); 
his  words  were  merely  the  natural  accents  of  guilty  fear. 

8 This  Beems  the  correct  inference  from  the  words  of  St.  Mark  {to.  fj.tS6f>ia 
Tvpov,  ch.  \ii.  21)  collided  with  the  incidental  comment  of  St.  Matthew  (airb 
tcov  bpiuiv  fKtivuiv  i£<\$oii<ra,  ch.  XV.  22).  At  present,  it  would  seem,  our  Lord 
had  not  actually  crossed  into  the  territory  of  Tyre,  but  was  in  the  district 
closely  contiguous  to  it.  Origen  {in  Mutt.  Tom.  xi.  16)  rightly  connects  this 
journey  with  the  offence  given  to  the  Pharisees  by  our  Lord's  declaration  to  the 
multitudes  on  the  subject  of  inward  and  outward  pollution  (Matt.  XV.  11.  Marie 
vii.  15).  Compare  also  GreswelL,  Dissert,  xxm.  Vol.  h.  p.  854.  That  it  was  a/so 
for  quiet  and  repose  (F.uthy m.)  is  to  be  inferred  from  Mark  vii.  24. 


202  THE    MINISTRY    IX    NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

Apostles  in  the  things  pertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  God. 
But,  as  St.  Mark  records,  "lie  could  not  be 

Mark  vii.  24. 

hid.  There  was  faith  even  in  those  dark- 
ened and  heathen  lands,  and  a  faith  that  in  one  instance 
at  least  was  proved  and  was  blessed.  No  sooner  was  it 
known  that  the  Lord  was  there  than  one  poor  woman  at 

once  crossed  the  frontier,  which  as  yet  the 

Matt.  xv.  22.  J 

Redeemer  had  not   passed,  and  with  those 

strange  words  on  heathen  lips,  "  Have  mercy  on  me,  Lord, 

thou   Son  of  David,"  called   upon   the  Lord 

Ver.22.  .  .  l 

with  importunate  energy  to  heal  her  demo- 
niac daughter.  The  whole  tenor  of  the  narrative  of  both 
the  Evangelists  who  relate  the  incidents  seems  clearly  to 
show  that  this  passionate  call  and  these  wildly-uttered 
words  at  first  met  with  no  response.1  Our  Lord  was  silent. 
When,  however,  that  suppliant  drew  nigh,  when  she  fell 
at  her  Redeemer's   feet,  and   uttered   those  pity-moving 

words  of  truest  faith,  "Lord,  help  me,"  then 

Matt.  xv.  25.  .  . 

was  it  that  the  all-merciful  One  beheld  and 
vouchsafed  to  accept  a  fiiith  that  was  permitted  to  extend 
the  very  sphere  of  His  own  mission.  The  Canaanite  was 
heard;  the  descendant  of  ancient  idolaters2  was  practi- 
cally accounted  as  one  of  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel ;  the  devil  was  cast  out,  and  the  child  was  healed.3 


1  See  Matthew  xv.  23.  That  this  silence  on  the  part  of  our  Lord  was  designed 
to  prove  the  faith  of  the  woman  is  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  commentators  (see 
Chrys.  in  Matt.  Horn.  hi.  2),  and  seems  certainly  borne  out  by  the  trying 
answer  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  xv.  20,  Mark  vii.  27)  which  was  vouchsafed  to  her 
second  entreaty.  To  suppose  that  our  Lord  was  here  condescending  to  the 
prejudices  of  the  apostles  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p.  253)  is  not 
probable  or  satisfactory;  still  less  so  is  the  supposition  that  He  was  simply  over- 
come by  her  faithful  importunity  (Do  Wette,  Meyer);  as  Chrysostom  properly 
Bays,  Ei  /.irj  8oui>at  e/j.e\\eu,  ov&  ais  fxera  ravra.  cScoKeif.  Vol.  vii.  p.  598  (ed. 
Bened.  2). 

2  The  term  Xavavata,  used  by  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xv.  22),  seems  fully  to  justify 
this  statement.  She  is  termed  'EAA.tjw's  (!.  c.  a  heathen,  not  of  Jewish  descent), 
l.'jfHKpoivlKiffcra  (Laehm.)  or  2i'pa  QoiviKioffa  (  JHsch.)  red  -yeVei  by  St.  Mark  (ch. 
vii.  20),  a  definition  perfectly  accordant  with  that  of  St.  Matthew,  as  these  Syro- 
Phcenicians  probably  derived  their  origin  from  the  remains  of  old  Canaanite 
nations  which  had  withdrawn  on  the  conquest  of  Palestine  to  the  extreme 
northern  coasts.     Comp.  Winer,  RWB.  Ait.  "  Canaaniter,"  Vol.  i.  p.  210. 

3  On  this  miracle,  the  characteristics  of  which  are  that  it  was  performed  on 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.  203 

How  long  our  Lord  abode  in  these  regions  we  know  not; 
but  as  this  touching  miracle  is  the  only  inci- 
dent recorded  by  the  Evangelists,  and  as  the     ikc„P'„  ,Zi"ri* 
privacy  which  our  Lord  sought  for  was  now     %£»"*<™*f«» 
still  less  likely  to  be  maintained,  we  may, 
perhaps,  not  unreasonably  conclude  that  after  a  short  stay, 
yet  probably  long  enough  for  His  enemies  to  have  returned 
back  to  Jerusalem,  our  Lord  again  turned  His  steps  back- 
ward, passing  through  the  midst  of  the  semi-pagan  Decap- 
olis,1  and  ultimately  approaching  the  sea  of  Galilee,  as  it 
would    seem,  from    the  further   side  of  the 
Jordan.     Equally,  or  nearly  equally,  ignorant     3^°'"p-  ih"'k  ''"• 
are  we  of  the  extent  of  this  northern  journey; 
if,  however,  we  adopt  a  reading  which  now  finds  a  place  in 
most  critical  editions,2  we  are  certainly  led  to  extend  this 
journey  beyond  the  Tyrian  frontier,  and  further  to  draw 
the  interesting  inference,  that  our  Lord,  moved  probably 
by  the  great  faith  of  the  Syro-Phoenieian  woman,  actually 
passed  into  the  heathen  territory,  visited  ancient  and  idol- 
atrous  Sidon,3  and  from  the    neighborhood  of  that  city 


one  of  heathen  descent,  at  a  distance  from  the  sufferer  (comp.  p.  132,  note  2), 
and  in  consequence  of  the  great  faith  of  the  petitioner  (  '  vox  humilis  Bed  celsa 
fides,"  Sedulius),  see  Cbrysost.  in  Matt.  Horn,  lii.,  Augustine,  Serm.  lxxvii. 
Vol.  v.  p.  4S3  (ed.  Migne),  Bp.  Hal],  Contempt,  iv.  1,  Trench,  Miracles,  p.  839 
sq.,  and  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  5. 10,  Part  u.  p.  80o  sq.  The  allegorical  reference 
according  to  which  the  woman  represents  the  Gentile  Church,  and  her  daughter 
t?V  irfju^iv  Kvpitvoixii>t)v  hch  Sai/xufow,  is  briefly  but  perspicuously  noticed  by 
Euthymius  in  Matt.  xv.  28. 

1  See  above,  p.  192,  note  4,  where  the  character  of  this  confederation  is  briefly 
noticed. 

2  The  reading  in  question  is  i)\&ev  5ia  "SiBuvos  (Mark  vii.  81),  which  is  found 
in  the  Codex  VaticanUS  and  Codex  Bezas,  in  the  valuable  MS.  marked  L,  in  A 
(Codex  Sangallensis),  and  in  several  ancient  versions  of  considerable  critical 
value,  e.  g.  the  Old  Latin,  Vulgate,  Coptic,  and  Etbiopic.  It  lias  been  adopted 
by  Lachmann,  Tischendorf,  Fritzsche,  Meyer,  Alford,  and  Tregelles,  and  appears 
certainly  to  deserve  tlie  preference  which  those  critics  and  commentators  have 
thus  unanimously  given  to  it.     See  Meyer,  Komment.  nh.  Mark.  p.  80  (ed.  3). 

3  It  is  not  safe  to  enlarge  upon  a  point  which  rests  only  on  a  probable  reading; 
but  if  we  accept  this  reading,  it  must  be  acknowledged  as  a  fact  of  the  greatest 
significance  in  reference  to  the  subsequent  diffusion  of  the  Gospel,  that  the  city 
of  Baal  and  of  Astarte  Mas  \  Isited  by  the  Redeemer  of  mankind.  See  above,  p. 
201.     This  question  is  worthy  of  further  consideration. 


204  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

commenced  His  south-easterly  circuit  towards   Decapolis 
and  the  further  shore  of  the  sea  of  Gennesareth. 

On  that  shore  He  was  not  now  to  be  a  strange   and 

unwelcome  visitor.     There,  in  that  region  of 

netun  to  Decap-     Decapolis,  lips   by  which    devils    once    had 

olis;    healing  of  a 

deaf  and  dumbman.     spoken  had  already  proclaimed   the   power 

Contrast  Matt.  ix.  . 

34.  and  majesty  of  Him  that  had  now  vouchsafed 

zukeviii.39.         to  journey  through  that  darkened  land;  and 

there  too  those  lips  had  not  spoken  in  vain. 
No  sooner  had  the  Lord  appeared  among  them,  than,  as 

St.  Mark  relates  to  us,  His  healing  powers  are 

besought  for  a  deaf  and  all  but  dumb  man 
who  is  brought  to  Him,  and  brought  only  to  be  healed.1 
It  is  worthy  of  a  moment's  notice  that  both  this  and  a 

miracle   performed    shortly  afterwards  on  a 

Mark  viii.  22.  i  i  •       i  t-»i         •  i       t     i  • 

blind  man  at  T>etnsaida-Julias  Mrere  accom- 
panied with  a  withdrawal  of  the  sufferer  from  the  throng 
of  bystanders,  special  outward  signs,  and,  in  the  case  of 
the  latter  miracle,  a  more  gradual  j^rocess  of  restoration. 
All  these  differences  it  is  undoubtedly  right  to  connect 
with  something  peculiar  in  the  individual  cases  of  those  on 
whom  the  miracle  was  performed;2  yet  still  it  does  not 
seem  improper  to  take  into  consideration  the  general  fact 
that  these  were  miracles  performed  in  lands  which  the 
Lord  had  before  traversed,  —  lands  where  the  nature  of 
His  healing  powers  might  have  been  wholly  misunderstood, 
and  to  which,  for  the  spiritual  benefit  of  the  sufferers,  it  was 
judged  meet  that  their  earnest  and  deliberate  attention3 

1  On  this  miracle,  the  characteristics  of  which  are  alluded  to  in  the  text,  see 
the  comments  of  Maldonatus  and  Olshauscn,  Hook,  Serm.  on  the  Miracles,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  49  sq.,  Trench,  ATotes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  348  sq.,  and  Hare  (Jul.),  Serm. 
xiv.  Vol.  i.  p.  245. 

2  See  Olshausen  on  the  Gospels,  Vol.  ii.  p.  20G  (Clark),  who  comments  at  some 
length  on  the  peculiarities  in  the  performance  of  this  miracle,  and  in  that  of  the 
healing  of  the  blind  man  at  Bethsaida.  Some  good  comments  will  also  be 
found  in  Maklonatus,  Comment,  in  Marc.  vii.  33.  The  withdrawal  from  the 
crowd  is  ascribed  by  the  scholiast  in  Cramer's  Catena  (Vol.  i.  p.  338)  to  a  desire 
on  the  part  of  our  Lord  to  avoid  display  {'iva  nr)  Sity  iiriSeiKTiK&s  hrtreAeut 
Tas  &€OffT)/.ua.s)  ;   but  this,  in  the  present  case,  seems  very  doubtful. 

3  So  in  eil'ect  Maldonatus:  "  Quia  ergo  qui  surdi  sunt,  videntur  re  aliqul  obtu- 


Lect.  V.       THE  MINISTRY   IX   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  205 

should  be  especially  directed.    Both  these  miracles,  we  may 

also  observe,  were  accompanied  with  a  command  to  preserve 

silence,1  but  in  the  case  of  the  present  miracle 

it  was  signally  disobeyed.     So  widely,  indeed, 

was  the  fame  of  it  spread  abroad  that  great  multitudes,  as 

we   are  told  by  St.  Matthew,  brought  their 

sick  unto  the  Lord  ;  and  He,  who  as  He  Him-       _     ' 

Ver.  24. 

self  had  but  recently  declared,  was  not  come 
"save  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel,"  nevertheless 
sought  His  Father's  glory  even  amidst  half-Gentile  Decap- 
olis ;  so  that  it  is  not,  perhaps,  without  deep  meaning  that 
the  first  Evangelist  tells  us  that  "the\r  glorified 

°  J  °  Ch.  xv.  31. 

the  God  of  Israel."2    And  they  were  yet  to      ne/eeding qfoe 
glorify  Him  more,  and  to  be  the  witnesses  of 
the  creative  as  well  as  of  the  healing  powers  of  His  beloved 
Son.  Those  eager-hearted  men  had  now  so  swelled  in  num- 
bers  that   four    thousand,  without  counting 

,         ...  '  °  Matt.  xv.  38. 

women  and  children,  were  gathered  round  the 
Lord  and  His  Apostles,  and  He  who  had  so  pitied  and  re- 
lieved their  afflictions  now  pitied  and  relieved  their  wants. 
They  had  come  from  far;    they  were  faint 

,  .  .  .  Mark  I'm.  3. 

and    weary,    and    were    to    be    miraculously 

refreshed.     Seven  loaves  feed  the  four  thousand,  just  as,  a 

few  weeks  before,  and  perhaps  not  far  from  the  same  spot,3 


r:itus  habere  aura,  mittit  digitnm  in  aures  surdi,  quasi  clansas  et  obturates  tere- 
braturus,  aul  impedimentum,  quod  in  illie  erat,  ablatarua  digito.  El  quia  qui 
muti  sunt,  videntur  ligatam  nimia  siccitate  habere  linguam  (.'),  palatoque  adhs- 
rentcm,  ideoquc  loqui  non  posse  .  .  .  mittit  salivam  in  os  muti,  quasi  ejus  linguani 
humectatnrus." —  Vol.  i.  p.  762(Mogunt.  1G11). 

i  Bee  above,  p.  180,  note  3. 

2  This  did  not  escape  the  notice  of  Origen  {in  .^fatt.  Tom.  XI.  18),  who  remarks 
aa  follows:  "Tea,  they  glorify  Him,  being  persuaded  that  the  Father  of  Him 
who  healed  the  man  above-mentioned  is  one  and  the  same  God  with  the  God  of 
I  irael ;  for  God  is  not  the  God  of  the  Jews  only,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles."  — Vol. 
iii.  p.  008  (ed.  liened.).  Theophylaot  {in  Matt.  xv.  29)  places  the  Bcene  in  Galilee, 
-  the  parallel  passage  in  St.  Hark  (cb.  vii.  81  sq.)  seems  clearly  to  prove, 
not  correctly.    Comp.  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  897,  note 2. 

8  The  locality  is  not  very  clearly  defined,.  That  it  was  an  uninhabited  place 
appears  from  Matt.  xv.  88,  and  that  it  was  on  the  high  ground  east  of  the  lake 
may  be  inferred  from  ver.  81.  As  the  spot  to  whioh  our  lord  crosses  over  i^ 
situated  about  the  middle  of  the  western  coast,  we  may  perhaps  consider  the 

18 


206  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

five  loaves  had  fed  a  greater  number;  "they  did  all  eat," 
says  the  first  Evangelist,   "and  were  filled, 

Matt.xv.37;  J  °  '  ' 

and  they  took  up  of  the  broken  meat  that 
was  left  seven  baskets  full." 

We  may  here  pause,  yet  for  a  moment  only,  to  make  our 
decided  protest  against  that  shallow  criticism 

Not  identical  with  <  *  ° 

the  feeding  of  the     which  would  persuade  us  that  this  distinctive 

five  thousand.  .  .        .  .  ... 

miracle  is  merely  an  ill-remembered  repro- 
duction of  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand  a  few  weeks 
before.1  Few  opinions  can  be  met  more  easily;  few  of 
the  many  misstatements  that  have  been  made  in  reference 
to  the  miracles  of  our  Redeemer  can  be  disposed  of  more 
readily  and  more  satisfactorily.  Let  it  be  observed  only 
that  everything  that  might  seem  most  clearly  to  specify 
and  to  characterize  is  different  in  the  two  miracles.  The 
number  of  loaves  in  the  latter  miracle  is  greater;  the 
number  offish  greater;  the  remnants  collected  less;  the 
people  fewer;  the  time  they  had  tarried  longer;  their 
behavior  in  the  sequel  noticeably  different.  The  more 
excitable  inhabitants  of  the  coast-villages  of  the  north 
and  the  west,2  we  are  distinctly  told,  would 
have  borne  away  our  Lord  and  made  Him  a 
king,  if  He  had  not  withdrawn  into  the  mountains ;  the 
men  of  Decapolis  and  the  eastern  shores  permit  the  Lord 

high  ground  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  ravine  nearly  opposite  to  Magdala, 
which  is  now  called  Wady  Semak,  as  not  very  improbably  the  site  of  the  present 
miracle. 

1  See,  for  example,  De  Wette,  on  Matt.  xv.  29,  and  Tseander,  Life  of  Christ, 
p.  287,  note  (Bohn).  The  remarks  in  the  text  seem  sufficiently  to  demonstrate 
that  such  a  view  is  wholly  untenable.  See  more  in  Olshausen,  Comment.  Vol.  ii. 
p.  209  sq.  (Clark),  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch.  §  86,  p.  433;  and  compare 
Origen,  in  Matt.  xi.  19,  Vol.  iii.  p.  509  (ed.  Bened.),  Alford,  Commentary,  Vol. 
i.  p.  157  (ed.  4). 

2  The  recipients  in  the  case  of  the  former  miracle  appear  to  have  come  mainly 
from  the  western  side.  Compare  Mark  vi.  33.  They  followed  our  Lord,  we  are 
told,  on  foot  (Matt.  xiv.  13),  and  would  consequently  have  passed  round  the 
northern  extremity  of  the  lake,  receiving  probably,  as  they  went,  additions  from 
Bethsaida-Julias  and  the  places  in  its  vicinity.  Chrysostom  {in  Matt.  Horn. 
Liu.  2)  seems  to  imply  that  the  effect  produced  by  this  miracle  was  as  great  as 
that  produced  by  the  former  miracle;  this  may  have  been  so,  but  it  certainly 
cannot  be  inferred  from  the  words  of  the  sacred  narrative. 


Lect.  V.        THE    MINISTRY    IN    NORTHERN    GALILEE.  207 

to  leave  them  without  any  recorded  excitement  or  demon- 
stration. Let  all  these  things  be  fairly  and  temperately 
considered,  and  there  will,  I  firmly  believe,  be  found  but 
few  indeed  who  will  feel  doubt  or  difficulty  as  to  the  sep- 
arate and  distinct  nature  of  this  second  manifestation  of 
the  Lord's  creative  beneficence.1  Immediately 
after  this  miracle  our  Lord  leaves  a  land  which  emMe^thetau. 
seems  to  have  displayed  somewhat  striking 
faith,  and  on  which  His  divine  visit  could  hardly  have 
failed  to  have  exercised  a  permanent  spiritual  influence, 
for  the  familiar  shores  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  lake. 
He  crosses  over  to  Magdala,8  or  perhaps  to  some  village 
close  to  the  high  ground  in  its  vicinity,  which  seems  alluded 
to  in  the  designation   Dalmanutha,3  as   specified   by   the 

1  On  the  miracle  itself,  which  Origeu  (in  Matt.  Tom.  xi.  19),  though  on  some- 
what insufficient  reasons,  considers  us  even  greater  than  that  of  the  feeiling  of 
the  live  thousand,  see  Origen,  /.  c.  Hilary,  in  Mutt.  Can.  xv.  p.  542  (Paris,  1031), 
Augustine.  Sinn,  lxxxi.  Append,  (but  apparently  rightly  regarded  by  Trench 
as  genuine).  Vol.  v.  p.  1902  (ed.  flligne),  Hook,  Serm.  on  the  Miracles,  Vol.  ii. 
p.  66,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  MiracU  g,  p.  355.  The  idea  of  Hilary  (he.  cit.)  that 
the  tinnier  miracle  has  reference  mainly  to  the  Jews,  the  present  miracle  to  the 
(.entiles,  is  perhaps  not  wholly  fanciful;  the  multitude  in  the  present  case  we 
may  reasonably  conceive  to  have  been  collected  nearly  entirely  from  Decapolis, 
and  so  mainly  Gentile;  the  multitude  in  the  former  case,  as  we  have  observed, 
was  apparently  from  Capernaum  and  its  vicinity,  and  probably  mainly  Jewish. 
Compare  p.  190,  note  1. 

2  This  place  is  now  unanimously  regarded  by  recent  travellers  as  situated,  not 
on  the  eastern  side  of  the  lake  (Light foot.  Decas  Chorographica  Marco  prcemi issa , 
cap.  v.  1 ).  hut  on  the  western  side,  and  at  the  miserable  collection  of  huts  now 
known  by  the  name  of  "el-Medjel."  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  397 
(ed.  2),  Thomson,  Land  am!  tin  Jinn!;.  Vol.  ii.  p.  108,  where  there  is  a  sketch  of 
this  forlorn  village,  and  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir,  p.  334.  It  is  proper  to  observe 
that  some  8188.  and  versions  of  importance  (T5D;  Vulg.,  Old  Lat.,  al.)  read 
MayaSdv,  and  that  this  reading  has  been  adopted  by  some  recent  editors.  Of 
this  latter  place  nothing  seems  to  be  known;  the  identification  with  .Mcgiddo 
(Ewald,  1'i-ii  Erst.  Evv.  p.  208,  Gesch.  Christus\  p.  333)  docs  not  seem  very 
probable. 

•'!  The  exact  locality  of  Dalmanutha  is  difficult  to  trace.  It  must  clearly  have 
been  near  to  Magdala,  as  St.  Mark  (eh.  viii.  10)  specifies  it  as  the  place  Into  the 
neighborhood  of  which  our  Lord  arrived  in  the  transit  across  the  lake  which 
we  an-  now  considering,  II' we  accept  the  nut  improbable  derivation  of -l~, 
'•was  pointed"  (Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  \>.  812),  we  may  fix  (he  locality  as 

among  the  oliffi  (see  Thomson's  .-ketch)  which  rise  at  a  short  distance 

from  Magdala.    Porter  indentifles  Dalmanutha  with  "Ain  el-Barideh" (Smith, 

Diet.  Of  Bibli  .  Vol.  i.  p.  881 ).  nituated  at  the  mOUth  of  a  narrow  glen  a  mile  south 

■  I'    Magdala,  but  this  appears  only  to  rest   on  the  fact  that  ruins  are  found 
there. 


208  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

second  Evangelist.     But  there  His  abode  was  short.     The 
evil  wrought  by  the  emissaries  from  Jerusa- 

Ch.  viii.  10.  &  J 

lem  was  now  only  too  mournfully  apparent. 
No  sooner  was  the  Lord  arrived  than  Pharisees,  now  for 
the  first  time  leagued  with  Sadducees,  as  once  before  they 

had  combined  with  Herodians,  come  to  Him 

Hark  Hi.  6.  •    i         i  -it  -i         r>  •  n 

„  „     . ,         with  the  sceptical  demand   of  a  sign  from 

Matt.  xvi.  1.  1  £3 

heaven.  Amid  such  faithless  and  probably 
malevolent  hearts  the  Lord  vouchsafes  not  to  tarry,  but,  as 
it  would  seem  immediately,  enters  the  vessel  in  which  He 
had  come,1  and  with  warning  words  to  them,  and  a  special 

caution  to  His  disciples  against  the  leaven  of 

Matt.  xv.  2sq.  I  O 

ci,.  xvi.  6-,         their  teaching,  crosses  over  to  Bethsaida-Ju- 
lias,  and   there   performs   the   progressively 
developed  miracle  of  healing  the  blind  man  to  which  we 
have  recently  alluded.2 

From  thence  we  trace  the  Lord's  steps  northward  to  the 
.towns  and  villages  in  the   neighborhood  of 

Journey     north-  •  r     /-t  -™  •  i  •        ■  i 

ward  to  ccesarea     the   remote  city  of  Ca2sarea  Phihppi,    near 

which  it  is  just  possible  that  He  might  have 

passed  in  His  circuit  from  Sidon  a  very  few  weeks  before. 


1  The  words  of  St.  Mark  are  here  so  very  distinct  (traKtv  tafias  air)jA.&€i/, 
ch.  viii.  12)  that  the  supposition  of  Fritzsche,  that  our  Lord  crossed  over  alone 
to  the  place  where  he  was  questioned  by  the  Pharisees,  and  that  he  was  after- 
wards joined  by  His  disciples  (Matt.  xvi.  6),  must  be  pronounced  wholly  unten- 
able. The  disciples  are  mentioned  specially  and  by  themselves  (Matt.  xvi.  5) 
simply  because  they  alone  form  the  subject  of  the  iireAd&ovTo,  and  because  this 
act  indirectly  gave  rise  to  the  warning  instructions  which  follow. 

2  On  this  miracle,  the  chief  characteristic  of  which  is  the  very  gradual  and 
progressive  nature  of  the  cure,  see  the  comments  of  Olshausen  above  alluded  to 
(Comment.  Vol.  ii.  p.  206,  Clark),  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  359,  Hook, 
Serm.  on  the  Miracles,  Vol.  ii.  p.  20.  The  Bethsaida  here  mentioned  is  clearly 
not  the  village  on  the  western  side  (comp.  Theophylact  inloc),  but  Bethsaida- 
Julias,  by  which  the  Lord  would  naturally  have  passed  in  his  northward  journey 
to  Caesarea  Philippi. 

3  This  picturesquely  placed  city,  formerly  called  Panium  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xv. 
10.  3)  or  Paneas,  from  a  cavern  sacred  to  Pan  in  its  vicinity  (see  Winer,  IiWB. 
Vol.  i.  p.  207,  Stanley,  Palest,  p.  394),  received  its  subsequent  name  from  the 
Tetrarch  Philip,  by  whom  it  was  enlarged  and  beautified  (Joseph.  Antiq.  XVIII. 
2. 1,  Bell.  Jud.  II.  9. 1).  For  a  description  of  its  site  see  Eobinson,  Palestine, 
Vol.  iii.  p.  408  sq.  (ed.  2),  and  compare  Thomson,  Land  and  the  Poo!:.  Vol  i. 
p.  344  sq.,  where  there  is  a  sketch  of  the  singular  cavern  above  alluded  to. 


Lect.  V.        TUB    MINISTRY    IN    NORTHERN    GALILEE.  209 

Of  the  exact  purpose  of  this  journey,  or  of  the  special 
events  connected  with  it,  we  have  no  certain  knowledge, 
though  we  may  reasonably  infer,  from  the  incidental  men- 
tion of  a  formal  address  to  the  multitude  as 

,.  ,  ,..-.  ,,  ,  , .  ■  •  Mark  xiii.  .14. 

well  as  to  the  disciples,  that  public  teaching 
and  preaching  rather  than  seclusion  was  the  object  of  this 
extended  circuit.  However  this  may  be,  with  those  regions 
Ave  connect  three  circumstances  of  considerable  moment : 
First,  the  remarkable  profession  of  faith  in  Christ  as  the 
Son  of  the  living  God  uttered  by  St.  Peter  as  the  ready 
spokesman  of  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  accompanied  by  the 
remarkable  charge  on  the  part  of  the  Lord  that  they  should 
tell  it  to  no  man  ;  '  JSecondhj,  and  as  it  would  seem  almost 
immediately  afterwards,  the  Lord's  first  formal  prediction 
of  His  own  sufferings  and  death,  —  a  prediction  which 
jarred  strangely  on  the  ears  of  men  who  now  seem  to  have 
begun  to  realize  more  fully  the  divine  nature  and  Messiah- 
ship  of  their  beloved  Master;2  Thirdly,  the  Transfigura- 
tion, which  a  precise  note  of  time  supplied  by  two  Evan- 
gelists fixes  as  six  days  from  some  epoch  not 

°  J  r  Matt.  xiii.  1. 

defined,  but  which  the  more  general  comment         Markix.2. 
of  St.  Luke  seems  to  imply  was  that  of  the 
above-mentioned  confession,  and  of  the  discourses  associ- 
ated with  it.3 


l  The  true  reason  for  this  strict  command  (SiecrreiAaTo,  Matt.  xvi.  20),  at 
which  Origen  (in  Mutt.  Tom.  xii.  15)  appears  to  have  felt  some  difficulty,  would 
siriii  to  be  one  which  almost  naturally  BUggestS  itself;  viz.  that  our  Lord's  time 
w  a-  not  ;.  el  i  some,  ami  that  expectations  were  not  to  be  roused  among  those  who 
would  have  sought  to  realize  them  in  tumults  and  popular  excitement.  As  Cyril 
of  Alexandria  well  says,  "  lie  commanded  them  to  guard  the  mystery  by  a  sea- 
sonable silence,  until  the  \\  hole  ltlan  of  the  dispensation  should  arrive  at  a  suita- 
ble conclusion." —  ( ommi  at,  "n  St.  Luke,  Tart  i.  p.  220. 

-  on  this  prediction  see  a  good  sermon  by  Borsley,  Serm.  xix.  Vol.  ii.  p.  121 
(Dundee.  1810). 

8  The  six  days  are  regarded  by  Lightfoot  [Chron.  Temp,  mi.)  as  dating  from 
the'  words  la.-l  Bpoken  by  our  Lord.  This  view  differs  but  little  from  that  adopted 
in  the  text,  as  the  confession  of  St.  Peter  seems  to  stand  in  close  connection  with 
the  Lord's  announcement  of  His  own  sufferings  (see  Luke  ix. 21, 22), and  this 
last  announcement  to  have  suggested  what  follows.  A  more  inclusive  reference, 
however,  as  well  to  the  important  confession  as  to  what  followed,  appears,  on 
the  whole,  more  simiile  and  more  probable.     The  itfe*  of  St.  Luke  (ch.  ix.  28) 

1 8 ' 


210  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

On  the  mysteries  connected  with  this  third  event,  —  the 
m   ,    ,  glorified  aspect  of  Him  whose  very  garments 

The  locality  and  . 

significance  of  the     shone  bright  as  the  snows  of  the  mountain 

Transfiguration.  . 

on  which  He  was  standing ;  the  personal 
presence  of  Moses  and  Elias ;  the  divine  voice,  not  only 

of  paternal  love,  but  of  exhortation  and  com- 

Matt.  axH.  5-,     rnand,  "Hear  ye  Him,"  and   the  injunction 

""Erttef V'     of  the  Saviour  to  seal  all  in  silence  till  the 

Son  of  Man  be  risen  from  the  dead,  —  on  all 
this  our  present  limits  will  not  permit  me  to  enlarge.  Let 
me  only  remark,  first,  as  to  locality,  that  there  seems  every 
reason  for  fixing  the  scene  of  the  Transfiguration,  not  on 
the  more  southern  Tabor,  but  on  one  of  the  lofty  spurs  of 
the  snow-capped  Hermon;1  secondly,  as  to  its  meaning 
and  significance,  that  Ave  may,  not  without  reason,  regard 
the  whole  as  in  mysterious  connection  both  with  St.  Peter's 
profession  of  faith  and  with  that  saddening  prediction 
which  followed  it,  and  which,  it  has  been  specially  revealed, 
formed  the  subject  of  the  mystic  converse  between  the 

Lord  and  his  two  attendant  saints.     That  the 

Transfiguration  appears  generally  to  have 
had,  what  may  be  termed,  a  theological  aspect,  and  was 
designed  to  show  that  the  Law  and  the  Prophets  had  now 
become  a  part  of  the  Gospel,  cannot  reasonably  be  doubted; 
but  that  it  was  also  designed  to  confirm  the  Apostles  who 
witnessed  it  in  their  faith,  and  to  supply  them  with  spirit- 
ual strength   against   those  hours   of  suffering   and    trial 


shows  that  there  is  no  necessity  to  attempt  a  formal  reconciliation  (see  Chrysost. 
in  loc.)  of  his  note  of  time  with  that  supplied  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark. 

1  So  rightly  Lightfoot  (Hor.  He.br.  in  Marc.  ix.  2),  Iteland  (Pakest.  p.  334  sq.), 
and  apparently  the  majority  of  the  best  recent  commentators.  The  objections  of 
Lightfoot  to  the  traditional  site,  founded  on  the  high  improbability  of  so  sudden 
a  change  of  place,  are  nearly  conclusive;  and  when  we  add  to  this  that  the  sum- 
mit of  Tabor  was  then  occupied  by  a  fortified  town  (see  Robinson,  Palestine, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  359),  we  seem  certainly  warranted  in  rejecting  a  tradition  though  as 
old  as  the  sixth  century.  The  incidental  simile,  us  Xl"v>  °f  tne  graphic  St. 
Mark  (ch.  ix.  3)  might  well  have  been  supplied  to  him  by  one  to  whom  the  snow- 
capped mountain  suggested  it;  the  reading,  however,  though  fairly  probable 
(see  Meyer,  Komm.  iib.  Marl;,  p.  97),  is  not  certain,  c*>s  x1^"  not  being  found  in 
two  of  the  four  leading  manuscripts. 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.  211 

which  ouv  Lord  had  recently  predicted,  seems  pressed  upon 
us  by  the  position  it  occupies  in  the  sacred  narrative.1 

And  the  practical  faith  of  the  Apostles  was  verily  still 
weak,  for,  on  the  very  day  that  followed,  their  ne  ,,„,,,„,„/„ 
want  of  spiritual  strength  to  heal  a  deaf  and     " h,cU"J- 

_,        ,      -  .  ,  JkirL-  ix.  25. 

dumb  demoniac  afforded  an  opportunity,  only 

too  readily  seized,  to  some  Scribes  who  were  present,  of 

making  it  fully  known  to  the  gathering  multitudes.     They 

were  in  the  very  act,  St.  Mark  tells  us,  of  questioning  with 

the  disciples,  when  the  Lord,  with  His  face 

perchance  still  reflecting  the  glories  of  the 

past  night,2  comes  among  the  disputing  and  amazed  throng. 

After  a  general  rebuke  for  the  want  of  faith  shown  by  all 

around,3  the  Lord  commands  the  hapless  lad  to  be  brought 

1  This  view  seems  certainly  to  have  been  considered  probable  by  Chrysostom, 
■who  states  as  a  fifth  reason  why  Moses  and  Elias  appeared  in  attendance  on  the 
Lord,  that  it  was  "to  comfort  Peter  and  those  who  regarded  with  fear  the 
(Lord's)  Buffering,  and  to  raise  up  their  thoughts,"  —  in  Matt.  Horn.  LI.  2,  Vol. 
vii.  p.  688  (ed.  Bened.  2).  Comp.  Cyril  Alex,  on  St.  Luke,  Serm.  Li  Part  II.  p. 
227  (Transl.).  The  last-mentioned  wi  iter,  it  is  proper  to  be  observed,  also  clearly 
states  the  reason  alluded  to  in  the  text  for  the  appearance  of  Moses  and  Elias 
{ib.  p.  228),  and  BO,  as  we  might  imagine,  does  Origen,  who  briefly  but  perti- 
nently says,  ••  Hoses  the  Law  and  Elias  the  Prophets  are  become  one,  and  united 
with  Jesus  the  Gospel,"  —  in  Matt.  Tom.  xn.  43,  Vol.  iii.  p.  565  (cd.  Bened.). 
( >n  the  subject  generally,  besides  the  writers  above  referred  to,  see  August.  Serm. 
i.xxvm.  Vol.  v.  p.  490  (ed.  Migne),  Hall,  Contempt,  tv.  12.  Hacket,  vii.  Serm.  p. 
•ill  Bq.  (Loud  1675),  Frank,  Serm.  xi.vii.  Vol.  ii.  p.  318  (A.-C.L.),  Lange,  Lcben 
Jesii,  ii.  512,  Part  ii.  p.  902,  and  Olshauscn,  Commentary,  Vol.  ii.  p.  228  Bq. 
(Clark).  The  opinion  that  this  holy  mystery  was  a  sleeping  or  waking  vision 
(comp.  Milnuui,  Hist,  of  Christianity ,  Vol.  i.  p.  258),  though  as  old  as  the  days  of 
Teitullian  icontr.  Marc.  IT.  22),  is  ;:t  once  to  be  rejected,  as  plainly  at  variance 
with  the  clear,  distinct,  objective  statements  of  the  three  inspired  narrators. 

-'  This,  a.-  Euthymius  (second  altera.)  suggest.-,  may  perhaps  he  inferred  from, 
ami  be  the  Datura!  explanation  of,  the  strong  word  e^^dfj.^o-ai'  (xal  yap  euros 
((pfAKtodai  riva  XuPlv  **  T'iy  fieTauopcpctXTectis) ,  with  which  St.  Mark  (eh.  ix. 
].".),  whose  account  of  this  miracle  is  peculiarly  full  ami  graphic  (see  Da  Costa, 
The  Four  \\"ttn<  x.s.  ■■•',  p.  78  Bq.),  describes  the  feelings  of  the  multitude  when  they 
beheld  our  Lord.     Comp.  also  I'.engel,  in  Inc. 

8  The  avTo'is  (Mark  ix.  19,  Lachm.,  77.s-.7i.)  mail  refer  only  to  the  disciples 
(Me  er),  but  our  Lord's  use  of  the  strong  term  "  perverted,"  as  well  as"iaith- 
tees"  (<i  yo'ia  arricrTos  Kal  huo-Tpapijxivri),  specified  both  by  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Luke,  would  seem  to  show  that  the  address  is  to  both  parties,  if  indeed  not 
principally  to  the  disputing  Scribes.  Perverted  feelings  were  far  more  at  work 
in  the  o-u£r)T7]<ris  of  the  Scribes  than  in  the  exhibition  of  the  Imperfect  faith  of 
the  disciples  (hat  probably  tended  to  pnnokeit.  See  LigbtfOOt,  Hor,  Ikbr.in 
Matt.  xvii.  17. 


212  THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

to  him.     The  recital  of  what  followed,  from  the  pen  of  St. 

Mark,  is  here  in  the  highest  degree  graphic  and  sublime. 

The  whole  scene  seems  at  once  to  come  up  before  us:  the 

paroxysm  of  demoniacal  violence  brought  on  by  proximity 
Mark ix.  20.  to  the  Redeemer ; x  the  foaming  and  wallow- 
vcr.  23  sq.  ing  sufferer ;    the  retarded  cure  till  the  faith 

ver.io.  0f  tjie  fatner   is   niade  fully  apparent;    the 

crowding  multitude  ;  and  then  the  word  of  power ;  the  last 

struggle  of  the  departing  demon ;  the  prostra- 

„    -  tion  of  the  lad  after  the  fierceness  of  the  reac- 

Ver.  2i . 

tion,  and  the  upraising  hand  of  the  great 
Healer,  —  all  tend  to  make  up  one  of  those  striking  pic- 
tures which  so  noticeably  diversify  the  inspired  narrative 
of  the  second  Evangelist,  and  which  could  have  only  come 
originally  from  one  who  heard  and  saw  and  believed.2 
Our  Lord's  steps  appear  now  to  have  been  again  turned 
southward,  through  Galilee  towards  Caper- 
probawj temporary  naum,  at  which  place  the  next  recorded  event 
sMm  at  caper.    Jg  fche  miraculous   payment  of  the  tribute- 

money.     If,  as  seems  most  natural  both  from 
the  peculiar  use  of  the  term  (ra  Si'Spa^a),  and  still  more 


1  This  seems  implied  in  tlie  words  kolI  I5ai>  [sc.  o  Satfxowt(6fxevos  •  see  Meyer, 
in  loc]  avr6p,  ih  irvev^a  tb&vs  icrirdpa^iv  avr6i/  (Mark  ix.  20).  Something 
similar  may  be  observed  in  the  case  of  the  demoniac  in  the  synagogue  at  Caper- 
naum (Luke  iv.  34:  comp.  Lect.  iv.  p.  156)  and  that  of  the  Gergesene  demoniacs 
(Mark  v.  6  sq.,  Luke  viii.  28).  Lange  (Leben  Jesu,  n.  5.  13,  Tart  n.  p.  921)  con- 
siders the  paroxysm  as  an  evidence  that  the  power  of  our  Lord  was  already 
working  upon  the  lad,  but  the  view  adopted  in  the  text  seems  more  simple  and 
natural.  For  further  comments  on  this  miracle,  see  Origen.  in  Matt.  xiii.  3  sq., 
Vol.  iii.  p.  574  (ed.  Bened.),  Cyril  Alex.  Comment,  on  St.  Luke,  Serm.  hi.  Part  I. 
p.  231  sq.  (Transl.),  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  iv.  19,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p. 
362  sq.,  and  the  careful  exposition  of  the  whole  narrative  in  Olshausen,  Commen- 
tary on  the  Gospels,  Vol.  ii.  p.  238  sq.  (Clark). 

2  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark  that  reference  is  here  made  to  the  early 
and  universally  received  tradition  that  St.  Mark's  Gospel  was  written  under  the 
guidance  of  St.  Peter,  and  embodies  the  substance,  if  not  in  some  cases  the  very 
words,  of  that  Apostle's  teaching.  The  principal  testimonies  of  antiquity  ou 
which  this  assertion  rests  have  been  already  referred  to  (Lect.  i.  p.  29,  note  4),  to 
which  we  may  add  Tertulliau  contr.  Marc.  IV.  5.  Sec  further,  if  necessary, 
Guericke,  Eialeitung  in  das  N.  T.  §  39,  2,  p.  254,  (ed.  2),  and  the  introductory 
comments  of  Meyer  (Komment.  p.  3),  who  seems  fairly  to  admit  the  truth  of  the 
ancient  tradition. 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY   IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.  213 

from  the  context,  we  retain  the  old  opinion  that  it  was  the 
half-shekel  for  the  temple-service,1  we  must  attribute  the 
present  tardy  demand  of  a  tax  levied  some  months  before 
either  to  the  Lord's  frequent  absences  from  Capernaum,  or 
to  some  habit  of  delayed  collection  which  may  very  likely 
have  prevailed  in  places  remote  from  Jerusalem,  but  which, 
from  deficient  knowledge  of  local  customs,  we  are  unable 
formally  to  substantiate.2  The  present  stay  at  Capernaum 
was  probably  short,  and,  as  far  as  we  can  infer  from  the 
Lord's  desire,  expressed    on    His  homeward 

,-,  n  Murk  ii.  30. 

journey,  to  remain  unobserved,  one  ot  com- 
parative seclusion.  He  had  now  to  prepare  the  minds  of 
His  chosen  ones  for  the  heavy  trials  through  which  they 
must  soon  pass,  when  their  Master  was  delivered  up  into 
the  hands  of  men,  and  when  their  longings  for  a  trium- 
phant Messiah  were  to  be  changed  into  the  avowal  of  a 
crucified  Saviour.     On  their  late  return  through  Galilee, 


1  This  sum  was  to  be  paid  every  year  for  the  service  of  the  sanctuary  (E.vod. 
xxx.  10;  compare  2  Kings  xii.  4,  2  Chron.  xxiv.  6,  9)  by  every  male  who  bad 
attained  the  age  of  twenty  years  (see  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Abgaben,"  Vol.  i. 
p.  4),  and,  as  we  learn  from  the  Mishna  (w.Shekalim,"  1,  3),  was  levied  in  the 
month  Adar.  We  seem  therefore  obliged  to  have  recourse  to  some  supposition 
like  that  advanced  in  the  text.  Compare  Lightfoot,  Ilor.  Hebr.  in  loc.  Vol.  ii. 
p.  341  sq.  (Roterod.  1G8G),  and  see  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  377,  who 
gives  some  reason  lor  thinking  that  the  tax  might  have  been  regularly  paid 
about  the  feast  of  Tabernacles.  The  opinion  of  most  of  the  ancient  expositors 
that  the  reference  is  here  to  a  tribute  which  each  male  hail  to  pay  to  the  Roman 
government  ("tribntnm  Csesareum,"  Sedulins)  is  noticed,  not  disapprovingly, 
bj  Lightfoot,  and  has  been  zealously  defended  by  Wieseler  [Chron.  Synops. 
p.  284  Bq.),  but  to  such  a  view  the  words  of  our  Lord  (Matt.  xvii.  25,  26)  seem 
distinctly  opposed.  What  our  Lord  implies  by  His  question  to  st.  Peter,  and 
His  comment  on  the  Apostle's  answer,  seems  clearly  this:  —  as  Son  of  Ilim  to 
whom  the  temple  was  dedicated,  and  indeed  as  Himself  the  Lord  thereof,  He 
had  fullest  claim  to  be  exempted  from  the  tribute,  but  > t i  1 1  He  would  not  avail 
Himself  of  His  undoubted  prerogatives.  See  Hammond,  in  loc,  whose  discus- 
sion of  this  passage  is  both  clear  and  convincing. 

2  On  the  remarkable  miracle  by  which  the  half-shekel  was  paid,  the  design  of 
which,  we  may  humbly  conceive,  was  still  further  to  illustrate  and  substantiate 
what  was  implied  in  the  address  to  the  Apostle  ('-in  medio  aetu  Bubmissionifi 
emicat  majestas,"  —  Ben  gel),  see  the  extremely  good  comments  of  Trench, 
Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  372.  The  older  expositors  cannot  here  be  referred  to 
with  advantage,  as  they  nearly  all  adopt  the  apparently  erroneous  opinion  above 
alluded  to.  that  it  was  a  tribute  which  was  paid  to  the  Roman  government,  and 
adapt  their  comments  accordingly. 


214  THE   MINISTRY  IN   NORTHERN    GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 


when    their   hearts  were  dwelling  most  on   their   Lord's 
powers,  their  elation  was  checked  by  a  re- 

Mark  ix.  33. 


newal  of  the  sad  prediction  which  they  first 


heard     near    Caesarea    Philippi ;    and    now 

again,  in  the  quiet  of*  home,  the  same  holy  anxiety  may 
be  traced  to  check  that  pride  of  spirit  which  seems  to 
have  been  sensibly  manifesting  itself  in  the  apostolic  com- 
pany.    Such  manifestations  were  apparently  of  a  mixed 
character,  and  were  probably  due  to  very  different  influen- 
ces.    On  the  one  hand,  we  may  connect  them  with  a  more 
real  conviction  of  their  Lord's  divine  nature  and  Messiah- 
ship  ;  on  the  other  hand,  we  cannot  fail  to  observe  that 
they  involved  much  that  was  merely  carnal  and  worldly. 
This   pride  of  spirit   shoAved   itself,   as  we  are  especially 
informed,  in  unbecoming  contentions   among   themselves 
about  future  preeminence,  and  led  them  over- 
hastily  to  forbid  some  yet  undeclared  disciple,1 
who  was  casting  out  devils  in  their  Master's  name,  from 
continuing  to  do  what  they  might  have  remembered  they 
themselves  could  not  do  a  week  or  two  before,  when  an 
Markix  33.         agonized  father  called  to  them  for  help,  and 
Ver.  ss.  when  Scribes  stood  by  and  scoffed.     Humil- 

Mnit.  ji-iii.  C.  #  J 

ver.w.  ity,  forbearance,  avoidance  of  all  grounds  of 

matt,  xx^ii.  sq',-     offence,  love   towards    their    Master's   little 

ones,  gentleness,    and   forgiveness,   the   lost 

sheep,  and  the  debtor  of  the  ten  thousand  talents,  were  the 


1  It  would  seem  clear  from  our  Lord's  words  that  the  man  was  no  deceiver  or 
exorcist,  but  one  who,  as  Cyril  of  Alexandria  observes,  though  "  not  numbered 
among  the  holy  Apostles,  was  yet  crowned  with  apostolic  powers."  —  Comment, 
on  St.  Luke,  Serin,  lv.  Part  I.  p.  249  (Transl.),  where  there  are  some  other  good 
comments  on  this  very  suggestive  incident.  The  connection  of  thought  between 
the  notice  of  this  occurrence  on  the  part  of  St.  John  and  the  words  of  our  Lord 
which  preceded  is,  perhaps,  more  clearly  to  be  traced  in  St.  Mark  (ch.  ix.  37,  38) 
than  in  St.  Luke  (ch.  ix.  49).  Our  Lord's  declaration,  os  &*"  ev  tw  toiovtwv 
ttcuSiW  Sf'^ijTcu  e7rj  t<£  bv  A  fiaT  i  /j.ov  t/j.4  5  e  x  *  to  »,  seems  to  bring  to  the 
remembrance  of  St.  John  a  recent  case  which  appeared  at  variance  with  His 
Master's  words,  viz.  that  of  one  who  used  the  Lord's  name  and  yet  did  not 
evince  his  reception  of  Him  by  becoming  an  avowed  disciple.  The  remembrance, 
coupled  perhaps,  as  Theophvlact  suggests,  with  the  feeling  that  their  treatment 
of  that  case  had  not  been  right,  gives  rise  to  the  mention  of  it  to  our  Lord. 


Lect.  V.       THE   MINISTRY    IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  215 

wise  and  loving  lessons  which  the  Lord  now  specially 
vouchsafed  to  them  in  this  brief  period  of  tranquillity  and 
seclusion. 

And  here  this  portion  of  our  meditations  comes  to  a 
natural  and  suitable  close.1  Yet  ere  we  part  let  us  spend 
a  few  moments  in  recapitulation  and  retrospect. 

We  have  considered  this  afternoon  what  I  think  we 
cannot  but  deem  a  most  interesting  part  of 

t-»      -i  i  '     •    ,  -i  !_•    i  Conclusion     and 

our  Redeemer  s  ministry,  and  yet  one  which  recapitulation. 
does  not  perhaps  always  so  distinctly  present 
itself  to  the  general  reader  as  other  and  more  sharply  de- 
fined portions  of  the  Gospel-history.  We  have  perhaps 
been  led  to  admit  the  appearance  of  a  gradual  enlargement 
of  the  sphere  of  our  Master's  personal  ministries;  Ave  have 
journeyed  with  Him  in  half-heathen  lands  ;  we  have  seen 
saving  mercies  extended  to  those  who  were  not  of  the 
stock  of  Abraham  ;  we  have  seen  that  divine  presence  not 
withheld  from  the  dwellers  in  Decapolis ;  nay,  more,  we 
have  seemed  to  see2  that  priceless  blessing  vouchsafed 
to  strictly  pagan  regions,  the  land  of  Baal  and  of  Ashto- 
reth  ;  yea,  we  have  beheld,  as  it  were,  the  Lord's  prophetic 

1  After  tin's  period,  as  will  be  seen  in  the  following  Lecture,  the  nature  of  our 
Lord's  ministerial  labors  and  the  character  of  His  missionary  journeys  appear 
to  assume  a  completely  different  aspect.  The  whole  wears  the  character  of  being 
what  8fc  Luke  very  fitly  terms  it,  —  at  rip.4pai  rijs  a.va\i]i\iews  (ch.  ix.  61).  Though 

Jerusalem  is  the  point  towards  which  the  journeys  tend,  and  Jiid.ca  the  land  to 
which  a  portion  of  the  ministry  is  conliued,  yet  the  whole  period  is  so  marked 
by  interruptions  and  removals,  that  we  can  hardly  consider  it  as  standing  in 
ministerial  connection  witli  any  former  period.     See  above,  Lect.   ill.  p.   140, 

note  1. 

9  Here,  as  it  has  already  been  observed,  it  is  our  duty  to  speak  with  caution. 
That  our  Lord  approached  that  portion  of  Palestine  which  is  termed  the  "con- 
lines  of  Tyre  "  (to.  /xtdopia  Tvpov,  Mark  vii.  24,  — if  with  Teschendorf  we  adopt 
the  shorter  reading),  or,  with  more  latitude,  the  "parts  of  Tyre  and  Sidon  " 
(Tot  pepr)  Tvpou  ica\  2tSwvos,  Matt.  xv.  21),  is  indisputable,  but  that  lie  was 
plea  ed  actually  to  cross  the  frontier  rests  really  upon  a  probable  though  con- 
tested reading.  See  above,  p.  203,  note  2.  Modern  writers  appear  often  to  have 
fell  a  difficulty  in  the  supposition  that  our  Lord  went  beyond  the  Jewish  border 
(oomp.  Meyer,  Ub.  Mutt.  xv.  21 ),  but  this  feeling  does  not  seem  to  have  prevailed 
equally  among  the  earlier  writers,  some  of  whom,  as  (  hrvsostoui.  hi  Mutt .  Horn. 
Ml.  1.  not  only  speak  of  our  Lord's  having  departed  tis  65bt>  idvwi',  but 
endeavor  to  account  for  His  having  acted  contrary  to  a  command  which  He 
Himself  gave  to  His  Apostles.    Compare  Matt.  x.  5. 


216  THE  MINISTRY  IN  NORTHERN   GALILEE.       Lect.  V. 

performance  of  His  own  subsequent  command,  that  the 
message  of  mercy  should  be  published  not 

Matt,  xxviii.  19.  .         —      _  -      T  ,  , 

only  in  Judaja  and  Jerusalem,  but  even  to 
the  uttermost  bounds  of  the  wide  heathen  world.  All 
this  wc  have  seen  and  dwelt  upon,  —  and  I  trust  not  dwelt 
upon  wholly  in  vain.  To  some,  perchance,  the  grouping 
of  events  which  I  have  ventured  to  advocate  may  seem  to 
wear  the  aspect  of  partial  novelty ;  to  others  again  I  may 
have  seemed  to  press  unduly  characteristics  to  which  they 
may  feel  disposed  to  assign  a  different  or  a  modified  ap- 
plication. Be  this,  however,  as  it  may;  whether  such  a 
survey  of  this  portion  of  our  Lord's  life  be  regarded  as 
plausible  or  improbable ;  whether  such  an  endeavor  to 
trace  the  connection  of  events  during  a  period  where 
connection  is  doubtful  be  deemed  hopeful  or  precarious, 
matters  but  little,  provided  only  it  may  have  so  far  arrested 
the  student's  attention  as  to  lead  him  to  examine  for  him- 
self, patiently  and  thoughtfully,  the  harmonies  in  the  nar- 
rative of  His  Master's  life.1  Yea,  I  will  joyfully  count  all 
as  nought,  if  only  I  have  been  enabled  by  the  help  of  God 
to  stir  up  in  others  a  desire  to  look  more  closely  into  the 
connection  of  the  inspired  record,  and  have  helped  to 
strengthen   the   belief  that  the    earnest  student  may  un- 


1  Ii  is  much  to  be  feared  that  the  tendency  of  our  more  modern  study  of  the 
Gospels  is  to  regard  every  attempt  to  harmonize  the  sacred  narrative  with 
indifference,  if  not  sometimes  even  with  suspicion.  We  may  concede  that  recent 
harmonistic  efforts,  viewed  generally,  though  made  with  the  most  loyal  feelings 
towards  the  inspired  Word,  have  in  many  cases  been  such  as  cannot  stand  the 
test  of  criticism.  Kay,  we  may  go  further,  and  say  that  the  modern  tendency  to 
study  each  (Jospel  by  itself,  rather  than  in  connection  with  the  rest,  is  undoubt- 
edly just  and  right,  so  long  as  the  object  proposed  is  a  more  complete  realization 
Of  the  view  of  our  Lord's  life  as  presented  by  each  of  the  sacred  writers,  and  so 
long  as  it  is  considered  preparatory  to  further  combinations.  All  this  we  may 
willingly  concede,  and  yet  we  may  with  justice  most  strongly  urge  the  extreme 
importance,  not  only  in  a  mere  critical,  but  even  in  a  devotional  point  of  view, 
of  obtaining  as  complete  and  connected  a  view  of  our  Lord's  life  and  ministry 
as  can  possibly  be  obtained  from  our  existing  inspired  records.  And  this,  let  it 
be  remembered,  can  only  be  done  by  that  patient  and  thoughtful  comparison  of 
Scripture  with  Scripture  which  now  finds  such  little  favor  with  so  many  theo- 
logians of  our  present  day.  The  general  principle  on  which  such  comparisons 
ought  to  be  made  we  have  already  endeavored  to  indicate.    See  Lect.  I.  p.  31  sq. 


Lect.  V.       THE  MINISTRY  IN   NORTHERN   GALILEE.  217 

ceasingly  derive  from  it  fresh  subjects  for  meditation,  and 
that  the  seeker  may  verily  hope  to  find. 

May  God  move  us  all  to  dwell  upon  such  things  with  an 
ever  fresh  and  ever  renewing  interest.  May  His  eternal 
Spirit  guide  us  into  all  truth ;  and  may  He,  on  whose 
blessed  words  and  deeds  we  have  mused  this  afternoon, 
lovingly  draw  us,  heart  and  soul  and  spirit,  to  Himself. 
O  may  we  really  feel  that  to  commune  with  Him  here 
on  earth  is  the  most  blessed  privilege  that  the  Lord  has 
reserved  for  those  that  love  Him ;  yea,  that  it  is  a  very 
antepast  of  the  joys  of  those  realms  where  He  now  is, — 
a  very  foretaste  of  that  blessed  and  final  union,  when, 
whether  summoned  forth  from  the  holy  calm  of  Paradise, 
or  borne  aloft  from  earth  by  upbearing  clouds,1  the  servants 
of  Jesus  shall  enter  into  their  Redeemer's  presence,  and 
dwell  with  Him,  forever  and  forever. 


1  See  1  Thess.  iv.  17,  apTrayr\<j6fji&a.  iv  v(pe\ais, —  on  which  we  here  pause 
ouly  to  make  tin'  passing  comment,  that  the  sublime  picture  t lie  inspired  words 
present  is  commonly  missed  by  the  general  reader,  and  perhaps  obscured  by  the 
collocation  of  words  and  insertion  of  the  article  in  our  authorized  version. 
The  Greek  text  appears  to  imply  that  the  clouds  are,  as  it  were,  the  triumphal 
chariots  in  which  the  holy  living,  and,  as  it  would  seem  also,  the  holy  dead,  will 
be  borne  aloft  to  meet  their  coming  Lord.    See  Commentary  on  1  Tkess.  p.  66. 

19 


LECTURE   VI. 

THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWAED  JERUSALEM. 

AND  JESUS    SAID    UNTO    HI5I,   FOXES    HAVE    HOLES,   AND    BIUDS    OF    THE    AIR 
HAVE     NESTS;     BUT    THE     SON    OF    MAN    HATH     NOT    WHEKE    TO    LAV    HIS 

head.  —  St.  Luke  ix.  58. 

TnESE  mournful  and  affecting  words,  which  were  uttered 

nearly  at  the   commencement  of  the  period 

tc'r^TtL  f.ZZ't     which  we   are  now  about  to  consider,  form, 

imnion  of  the  in-     j  think,  n  very  suitable  text  for  our  present 

spired  narrative.  '  «  *■ 

meditations. 
The  scene  now  strikingly  changes.  Last  Sunday  we 
had  before  us  the  deeply  interesting  record  of  missionary 
journeys  into  heathen  and  half-heathen  lands.  We  seemed 
to  follow  our  Lord's  steps  to  the  very  gates  of  idolatrous 
Sidon,1  we  beheld  His  miracles  in  half-Gentile  Decapolis, 
we  traced  His  deeds  of  mercy  in  the  remote  uplands  of 
Galilee,  and  we  again  heard  His  loving  words  and  touch- 
ing parables  in  the  short  seclusion2  in  His  earthly  home  at 
Capernaum.  But  now  that  earthly  home  is  to  receive  Him 
no  more.  Six  months  of  anxious  wanderings  in  Judaea 
and  the  lands  on  the  further  side  of  Jordan,  interrupted 
only  by  brief  sojourns  in  remote  frontier-towns,  now  claim 

1  Sec,  however,  the  observations  on  this  point,  p.  215,  note  2. 

2  How  long  our  Lord  remained  at  Capernaum  after  His  return  from  the  dis- 
trict of  Cffisarea  Philippi  and  the  northern  parts  of  Galilee  is  in  no  way  specified. 
As,  however,  St.  Luke  passes  at  once  from  his  notice  of  the  contention  among 
the  Apostles  (which  we  know  took  place  before  they  had  actually  come  to  Caper- 
naum ;  see  Mark  ix.  83)  to  The  journey  of  our  Lord  to  Jerusalem,  we  are  perhaps 
correct  in  supposing  that  the  stay  was  short.  It  is  not  improbable  that  the 
approaching  celebration  of  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  led  to  the  return  from  the 
north,  and  induced  our  Lord  to  come  back  to  Capernaum,  not  only  as  being 
His  temporary  home,  but  as  being  a  convenient  starting-point  for  the  journey  to 
Jerusalem.    See  above,  Lect.  in.  p.  121,  and  note  2. 


Lect.  VL    THE  JOURXEYIXGS    TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  219 

our  attention  ;  —  six  months  of  ceaseless  activities  and  nil- 
resting  labor,  of  mighty  deeds  and  momentous  teaching, 
yet  six  months,  if  not  of  actual  flight,  yet  of  ever-recurring 
avoidance  of  implacable  and  murderous  designs1  that  were 
now  fast  approaching  their  appalling  and  impious  climax. 

What  I  have  just   said   serves   indirectly  to   define  the 
limits  of  our   present   section.     These,  how- 
ever, for  the  sake  of  clearness,  I  will  specify     liresc,'tt  ScctlUn. 
more  exactly,  as  commencing  with  the  Lord's 
journey  in  October  to  the  feast  of  Tabernacles,  and  con- 
cluding with  His  arrival  at  Bethany  six  days  before   the 
Passover. 

This  period,  I  need  scarcely  remind  you,  presents  to  the 
harmonist  and  chronologer  difficulties  so  un- 

0  I/itrmontstic  and 

usually  great,2   that  it  has   been   frequently     datalogical  </,£<- 

,  f     •         ■<  •  i  •  i  •  cutties. 

considered   a  matter  or  simple  impossibility 

to  adjust  in  their  probable  order  the  events  which  belong 

to  this  portion  of  the  narrative.     It  has  been  urged,  that 

i  It  would  seen)  probable  thai  :i  resolution  to  kill  our  Redeemer  had  been 
secretly  formed  among  the  leading  members  of  the  hierarchical  party  at  Jerusa- 
lem, perhaps  some  months  before  the  present  time.  If  we  are  correct  in  the 
view  we  have  taken  in  Lect.  iv..  that  the  machinations  against  our  Lord  in  Gali- 
lee were  due  to  emissaries  from  Jerusalem,  it  does  not  seem  wholly  improbable 
that  the  vengeful  feelings  of  the  Pharisaical  party,  which  first  definitely  showed 
themselves  at  the  feast  of  1  uritn  (see  above,  p.  121),  had  been  from  time  to  time 

fostered   by  the.-e  emissaries,  and  were   now  issuing  ill   designs  so  far  matured  as 
to  have  become  the  subjeel  of  frequent  comment,  and  of  almost  general  noto- 
riety.   See  especially  John  vii.25.    It  is  at  the  beginning  of  the  present  period 
that  we  meet  with  the  first  open  and  formal  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  authori- 
ties t"  la]  their  sacrilegious  hands  on  the  person  of  our  Lord.    See  John  vii.  82, 
w  here  it  will  be  observed  that  the  imperfectly  organized  attempt  noticed  two  or 
verses  before  (t^ijrow,  ver.  3U)  is  recommenced  under  official  sanction. 
Compare  Meyer,  Komment.  1)6.  Joh.  p.  286  (ed.  3),  and  Greswcll,  Dissert,  xxx. 
Vol.  ii.  p.  1  9. 
'-'  fhe  precise  nature  of  these  difficulties  are  explained  below,  p.  221.     Some 
rations  on   the  nature  of  that  portion  of  St.  Luke-  Gospel  with  which 
these  difficulties  are  chiefly  connected  will  be  found  in  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxt. 
Vol.  il.  [i.  617  sq.,  but  the  results  at  which  tin-  learned  writer  arrives,  viz.  that  Luke 

>.\  iii.  14  refers  to  our  Lord's  last  journey  to  Jerusalem,  and   that  to  doubt 

it  ■• ;.;  the  pert!  ctioo  of  scepticism  and  incredulity  "  (p,  640),  are  such  as  maj  be 
most  Justl]  called  into  question.  Some  useful  observations  on  this  portion  id' 
■  -pel  narrative  will  be  found  in  Itobinson.  Harmony  of  Gospels,  p.  82 
(Trad  Societj ).  Comp.  also  the  remarks  of  Dr.  Thomson  in  Smith's  Dictionary 
qfthe  Bib  ■  ,  Vol.  i.  p.  1061. 


220  THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

the  Evangelist,  to  whom  we  owe  the  recital  of  so  many  of 
the  circumstances  and  discourses  which  belong  to  this 
period,  has  here  failed  in  his  deliberately  an- 
nounced design  of  relating  in  order1  the 
events  of  his  Master's  life,  and  has  here  blended  in  one  in- 
coherent narrative  the  distinctive  features  and  elements 
of  the  last  three  journeys  of  our  Redeemer  to  Judaea  and 
Jerusalem.2  We  may,  indeed,  be  thankful  to  feel  and  know 
that  such  opinions,  which  in  fact  carry  with  them  their 
own  condemnation,  are  now  beginning  to  belong  to  the 
past.  We  may  with  good  reason  rejoice  that  of  late  years 
a  far  more  reverent  as  well  as  critical  spirit  has  been  at 
work  among  the  chronologers  and  expositors  of  the  sacred 
histories.  We  may  gladly  observe  that  order  and  connec- 
tion have  been  found  where  there  was  once  deemed  to  be 
only  confusion  and  incoherence,  —  that  the  inspired  narra- 
tives are  regarded  no  longer  as  discrepant  but  as  self-ex- 
planatory,—  and  that  honest  investigation  is  showing  more 
and  more  clearly  that  what  one  inspired  writer  has  left 
unrecorded  another  has  often  supplied,  with  an  incidental 
preciseness  of  adjustment  which  is  all  the  more  convinc- 
ing from  bein<x  seen  and  felt  to  be  undesigned.     All  this  it 


1  Some  comments  on  the  apparent  meaning  of  this  and  other  expressions 
used  by  St.  Luke  in  the  introduction  to  his  Gospel  will  be  found  above,  Lect.  I  v. 
p.  149,  note  1. 

2  See,  for  instance,  the  very  sweeping  and  objectionable  remarks  of  De  Wette, 
who  speaks  of  the  necessity  of  recognizing  in  this  portion  of  the  Evangelisfs 
record  "eine  unchronologische  und  unhistorische  Zusammenstellung"  (Erld. 
eJes  Luk.  p.  76),  and  conceives  that  it  resulted  from  St.  Luke*s  having  had  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  matter  before  him  relating  to  our  Lord's  ministry  which  he  did 
not  know  how  otherwise  to  dispose  of.  The  opinion  of  Schleiermacher,  and  after 
him  of  Olshausen,  Keander,  and  others,  that  we  have  in  tin's  portion  of  St. 
Luke's  Gospel  the  accounts  of  two  journeys,  the  one  terminating  at  the  Feast  of 
Dedication,  the  second  at  the  Passover,  is  at  first  sight  more  reasonable.  It  will 
be  found,  however,  to  involve  assumptions,  viz.  (a)  that  the  two  narratives  of 
the  two  journeys  were  blended  by  some  one  ignorant  of  the  exact  circum- 
stances, and  in  this  state  inserted  by  St.  Luke  in  his  Gospel  (Schleierm.),  or  (6) 
that  St.  Luke  re-wrote  the  accounts,  and  himself  helped  to  blend  them  (compare 
Olshausen,  Commentary,  Vol  ii.  p.  282  sq.),  which  must  be  pronounced  by  every 
sober  interpreter  to  be  as  untenable  in  principle  as  they  will  be  found  on  exam- 
ination to  be  unsupported  by  facts. 


Lect.  VI.    THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  221 

is  cheering  to  feci  and  know;1  yet  still  I  must  not,  and 
ought  not,  to  disguise  from  you  that  the  difficulties  in  our 
present  portion  of  the  Gospel-history  —  difficulties,  how- 
ever, which  I  firmly  believe  have  been  of  late  correctly 
cleared  up  —  are  still  such  as  must  sensibly  strike  the  gen- 
eral reader,  and  must  claim  from  me  a  few,  yet  only  a  few, 
explanatory  and  introductory  comments. 

The  facts  are  these.  Above  three  hundred  verses  of  St. 
Luke's  Gospel,  or  from  the  end  of  the  ninth 
to  nearly  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  chap-  ,£%££££* 
ter,  clearly  belong  to  the  period  that  wo  are 
now  about  to  consider,2  but  stand,  so  to  speak,  isolated  and 
alone.  The  two  other  Synoptical  Gospels  scarcely  supply 
more  than  two  or  three  parallel  notices,  but  after  the  mid- 
dle of  the  eighteenth  chapter  again  become  distinct  and 
explicit,  and  again  present  the  most  exact  coincidences 
with  the  narrative  of  the  third  Evangelist,3  —  coincidences 


1  We  may  observe,  by  way  of  example,  the  working  of  these  sounder  princi- 
ples in  the  manner  in  which  the  peculiar  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  to  which 
we  have  been  alluding  is  discussed  iu  the  best  recent  commentaries.  See,  for 
instance,  Meyer,  Komrnent  vb.  Luk.  p.  320  sq.  (ed.  3),  and,  in  our  own  country, 
Alford,  on  Luke  ix.  51,  both  of  whom,  though  too  scrupulously  declining  every 
attempt  to  reconcile  the  narrative  with  that  of  St.  John,  clearly  recognize 
(Meyer  in  a  less  degree)  its  unity  and  historical  importance.  The  assertion,  how- 
ever,  of  the  latter  writer,  that  St.  Luke  lihas  completely,  by  his  connecting 
words  in  many  places,  disclaimed"  any  chronological  arrangement  iu  this  por- 
tion of  his  Gospel,  seems  certainly  much  too  strong.  The  utmost  that  can  be 
said  is,  that  the  absence  of  notes  of  time  precludes  our  determining  the  precise 
epocb  at  which  the  events  specified  took  place,  and  the  intervals  of  time  between 
them,  but  thai  we  have  no  reason  whatever  to  doubt  that  in  necwly  a'.l  oases  the 
right  sequence  is  preserved.  In  other  words,  though  we  hare  no  chronology  in 
ti  i-  portion  of  the  third  Evangelist's  Gospel,  we  have  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
v.  •■  hai  i-  "/•■/'  /•.  <  in  this  distinction  see  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang,  (lesch.  §  11,  p. 
£0,  and  compare  Wieseler,  chmii.  Synopa.  p.  327  sq. 

-  A  lew  sections  may  perhaps  belong  to  an  earlier  portion  of  the  narrative, 
i  .  //.  I. tike  xi.  17  Sq.  compared  with  Mark  iii.  2ii  sq.,  I. uke  xiii.  18  sip  wilh  Mark 
iv.  30  sq.,  if  indeed  it  be  not  more  probable  that  the  substance  of  both  the  above 
sections  was  repeated  on  two  different  occasions.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synopt.  p.  288. 

•"  The  lii  st  point  of  resumed  connection  between  St.  Luke  and  the  first  and  sec- 
ond EvangelistB  is  apparently  to  lie  found  in  Luke  xvii.  n  compared  with  Matt, 
xix.  1.  2,  and  Mail;  x.  1,  —  St.  Luke  alluding  to  the  journey  (from  Kphraim;  sec 
John  xi. 64)  through  Samaria  and  Galilee, and  st.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  the 
continuation  of  it  through  Perssa  to  Judaea  and  Jerusalem.    The  more  distinct 

10* 


222  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

as  striking  as  the  former  absence  of  them  and  the  former 
comparative  silence.  But  this  is  not  all :  these  three 
hundred  verses  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  have  somewhat 
remarkable  characteristics.  They  are  very  rich  in  their 
recital  of  our  Lord's  discourses,  especially  of  those  which 
were  suggested  by  passing  occurrences,  but  they  contain 
but  few  of  those  notices  of  time  and  place1  which  we  so 
naturally  associate  with  the  narrative  of  the  historian 
Evangelist. 

Now  what  would  be  the  opinion  of  any  calm,  reasonable, 
and  reverent  man  upon  the  phenomenon  thus  presented  to 
him  ?  Why  clearly  this.  In  the  first  place,  he  would  at 
once  conclude  that  here  was  but  another  of  the  almost 
countless  instances  which  the  holy  Gospels  present  to  us 
of  the  mercy  and  wisdom  of  Almighty  God,  whose  Pater- 
nal Spirit  moved  one  Evangelist  to  relate  what  the  others 
had  left  unrecorded.2     In  the  second  place,  he  would  here 


point  of  union,  however,  is  the  narrative  of  the  young  children  being  brought 
to  our  Lord,  which  begins  ch.  xviii.  15,  and  stands  in  strict  parallelism  with 
Matthew  xix.  13  sq.  and  Mark  x.  13  sq.  After  this,  for  the  few  remaining  sec- 
tions, the  narrative  of  the  Synoptical  Evangelists  proceeds  harmoniously  onward 
to  the  close  of  the  portion  now  before  us.  Comp.  the  table  in  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synops.  p.  331. 

1  This  remark  will  be  best  verified  by  an  inspection  of  the  chapters  in  question. 
We  may,  however,  pause  to  specify  the  following  very  undefined  notices  of 
chronological  connection:  /uera  6e  toCto,  ch.  x.  1;  Kal  ISov,  ch.  x.  25;  iytvero 
8e,  ch.  x.  38;  ku\  tyevero,  ch.  xi.  1;  simply  ffai,  ch.  xi.  14,  xiii.  22;  eV  5e  t&j 
Aa\fj(rai,  ch.  xi.  37;  eV  oTs.  ch.  xii.  1;  elirev  Se,  ch.  xii.  22;  and  comp.  xiii.  6, 
xvi.  1,  xvii.  1,  xviii.  1;  Kal  iyeveTO,  ch.  xiv.  1;  Kal  €iVepxoiaf',/01'  aurov  ets  two. 
kw[xi]v,  ch.  xvii.  12.  The  only  really  definite  expressions  in  reference  to  time  are 
apparently  confined  to  ch.  xiii.  1,  31,  and  even  these  are  of  little  use  to  us,  owing 
to  the  events  with  which  they  stand  in  connection  themselves  being  undefined 
as  to  time.  With  regard  to  place,  for  examples  of  a  similarly  undefined  charac- 
ter, compare  ch.  x.  38,  xi.  1,  xiii.  10,  22,  xiv.  1,  xvii.  12.  It  may  be  admitted  that 
we  can  find  instances  of  a  similar  absence  of  definite  notices  of  time  and  place 
in  other  portions  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  but  in  none  so  regularly  and  continu- 
ously as  in  the  portion  now  before  us.  See  the  table  in  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Ev. 
Oesch.  §  32,  p.  131  sq. 

2  The  supplementary  relations  in  which  the  earlier-written  Gospels  appear  to 
stand  to  the  later-written  are  noticed  at  some  length  by  Greswell,  Dissert.  I. 
Vol.  i.  p.  15.  The  popular  objection,  that  we  have  no  intimations  in  the  sacred 
records  themselves  by  which  we  can  infer  where  one  is  to  be  regarded  defective 
and  others  supplementary  to  it,  is  considered  and  reasonably  answered  in  the 
Appendix,  Dissert.  I.  Vol.  iii.  p.  321  sq. 


Lect.  VI.     THE   JOURXEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  223 

recognize,  on  the  one  hand,  an  indirect  verification  of  that 
careful  research  which  was  openly  professed  by  the  third 
Evangelist;1  and,  on  the  other,  a  direct  proof  of  that  faith- 
fulness that  made  him  adopt  less  special  notices  of  the  strict 
connection  of  events  when  the  sources  of  information,  oral 
or  written,  to  which  he  had  been  moved  to  refer,  had  not 
fully  or  distinctly  supplied  them. 

Now  suppose  such  a  reasonable  thinker  had  observed,  as 
he  could  scarcely  fail  to  have  observed,  that 
the  fourth  Evangelist,  true  to  the  supplemen-  thi3  ,^,"Tp"  st, 
tary  character,  which  we  seem  to  have  very  ^y^Mn'"' 
sufficient  grounds  for  ascribing  to  several  por- 
tions of  his  Gospel,2  had  supplied  three  distinct  chronolog- 
ical notices  of  three  journeys  taken  toioard  if  not  all  actually 
to  Jerusalem  during  this  period  we  are  about  to  consider,3 
would  he  not  at  once  turn  back  to  St.  Luke  to  discover 
some  trace,  however  slight,  of  journeys  so  clearly  defined 
by  another  Evangelist?  And  would  he  turn  back  there  in 
vain?  Would  he  find  no  break  in  the  narrative,  no  indica- 
tions of  journeys  to  Jerusalem  beside  that  with  which  this 
portion  of  his   Gospel    commences  ?    Most  assuredly  not. 


1  This  seems  a  f;iir  representation  of  what  the  Evan/relist  designed  to  imply  by 
irapriKo\oudr)KuTi  avaibei/  nuffif  aKpi^is  (ch.  i.  8).    See  the  comments  on  this 

'•  in  Lect.  IV.  p.  119,  note  1.  The  view  of  the  ancient  Svriae  translator, 
according  to  which  irutri  is  masculine,  anil  Trap-qKoAouS.  Implies  proximity  ami 
personal  attendance  (sec  also  von  Gnmpach  in  Kitto,  Journal  of  Sacred  Lit.  for 
1849,  No.  viii.  p.  801),  deserves  attention  from  its  antiquity,  but  is  apparently 
rightly  rejected  by  all  the  besl  modern  expositors. 

2  See  above,  Lect.  i.p  30,  note  8,  and  compare  the  illustrations  supplied  by 
Grcswell,  Dissert,  xxi.— xxm.  Vol.  ii.  p.  196  sq.,  Dissert,  xxx.  Vol.  ii.  p.  is2  sq. 
Comp.  also  Ebrard,  Kritik  <l-  r  /•>.  Gesch.  §  37,  p.  160  pq. 

•"  The  objection  that  if  we  include  our  Lord's  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the  feast  of 
Dedication  we  might  seem  to  have /0«r  journeys  to  Jerusalem  (see  the  synopsis 
of  Lampe),  is  readily  removed  by  observing  that  the  way  in  which  St.  John  men- 
tions the  festival  and  our  Lord's  appearance  at  it  (John  x.  22),  combined  with 
the  (act  that  there  is  no  previous  mention  of  any  departure  from  JudSS  [con- 
trast John  x.  40),  leads  as  certainly  to  suppose  that  during  the  interval  between 
the  feast  of  Tabernacles  ami  that  of  the  Dedication  our  Lord  confined  llis  min- 
istry to  Judea.  See  p.  266.   If  this  be  so,  the  visit  to  the  latter  festfr  al  Is  not  to  be 

regarded  :i^  due  to  a  separate  or  second  journey,  but  only  a-  a  sequel  of  the  ti  i  St. 

Comp.  BengePs  more  correct  synopsis.  Gnomon,  Vol.  i.  p.  SSI,  ami  see  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Synops.  p.  018,  note  1. 


224  THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

Instead  of  all  seeming,  as  it  might  once  have  seemed,  the 
confused  recital  of  the  circumstances  of  but  one  journey, 
he  would  now  be  led  to  identify  the  journey  of  the  ninth 
chapter  of  St.  Luke  with  the  journey  to  the  feast  of  Tab- 
ernacles specified  by  St.  John;1  he  would  again  have  his 
attention  arrested  by  the  break  a  little  past  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  chapter,  and  would  see  how 
strikingly  it  agreed  with  St.  John's  notice  of 
the  second  journey  toward  Jerusalem,  that  reached  no  fur- 
ther than  Bethany;2  and,  lastly,  he  could  not  fail  to  pause 
at  the  special  notice  of  a  third  journey  towards  the  begin- 
ver. u.  ning  of  the  seventeenth  chapter,  and  would 

ai.xxi.  i.        naturally  connect  it,  not  only  with  the  express 
a'-  *■  '•  statements  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  but 

with  the  previous  retirement  to  Ephraim  so  distinctly  spe- 
cified by  St.  John.3    Such  would  be  the  result  of  a  fair  and 

1  The  main  argument/or  the  identity  of  the  journey  specified  John  vii.  10  with 
that  mentioned  Luke  ix.  51  rests  on  the  two  facts,  (a)  that  the  journey  specified 
by  the  third  Evangelist  was  through  Samaria  (Luke  ix.  52),  and  (/<)  that  the 
inhabitants  of  that  country  at  once  inferred  that  our  Lord's  destination  was 
Jerusalem  (ver.  53).  The  first  of  these  facts  is  in  complete  harmony  with  the 
avoidance  of  observation  specified  in  John  vii.  10;  the  second  is  in  equally  com- 
plete harmony  with  St.  John's  statement  of  the  object  of  that  journey  (hvifrf) 
els  t))v  kopTr\v,  ib.  ver.  10).  It  was  the  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  Samari- 
tans that  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  was  now  going  on  that  made  them  so  readily 
notice  and  recognize  the  direction  to  which  the  Lord's  face  was  now  turned. 
See  below,  p.  249.  The  main  objection  against  the  identity  lies  in  St.  Luke's 
rough  note  of  time,  ev  toS  cm/x7rAr}poDcr&af  ras  ii/nepas  rjjs  ava.\ri\peais  (ch.  ix. 
51),  which,  it  is  urged,  the  use  of  the  peculiar  term  ava\T]\pts  clearly  shows  can 
only  belong  to  a  last  journey  (see  Meyer,  in  loc,  and  compare  Greswell,  Dissert. 
xxxi.  Vol.  ii.  p.  522).  Why,  however,  may  not  the  very  general  term,  a!  T]fJ.epcu 
tj)s  avaAtyews  6  Katpbs  6  a$opi<T&eh  fJ-*XPl  TV5  araAr/^eois,  Enthym.)  suitably 
apply  to  the  period  between  the  conclusion  of  the  regular  ministry  of  our  Lord 
and  the  last  Passover,  — a  period  which  was  ushered  in  by  special  prophecies  of 
such  an  avaKytyis  (Mark  ix.  30),  and  which  throughout  wears  the  character  of 
being  a  season  of  preparation  for  that  final  issue?  Compare  p.  215,  note  1.  The 
interpretation  of  the  words  proposed  by  Wieseler  (Chron.  Synops.  p.  324.  Com- 
pare Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  5.  12,  Fart  n.  p.  1054).  — "the  days  of  His  having 
found  acceptance  with  men,"  is  contrary  to  the  New  Testament  use  of  the  verb 
(Mark  xvi.  19,  Acts  i.  2,  xi.  22,  1  Tim.  iii.  16),  and  completely  untenable. 

2  For  further  considerations  in  favor  of  the  connection  of  Luke  xiii.  22  with 
St.  John's  notice  of  our  Lord's  withdrawal  Tre'ptu'  tou  'lopSdvou  (ch.  x.  40),  and 
the  Mime  Apostle's  notice  of  the  journey  to  Bethany  (ch.  xi.  1),  see  below,  p.  262 
sq.,  and  compare  Wieseler,  CJiron.  Synops.  p.  321. 

3  With  John  xi.  54  we  seem  rightlv  to  connect  Luke  xvii.  11,  5nfyxeT0  5<® 


Lect.  VI.    THE  JOUKNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  225 

reasonable  investigation  into  the  narrative  of  St.  Lake, — 
aii'l  such  too  is  the  result  arrived  at  in  part  by  the  learned 
Lightfoot,1  and  more  distinctly  by  a  recent  investigator, 
whose  elaborate  treatise  on  the  chronology  of  the  Gospel 
history  may  justly  be  classed  among  the  most  successful 
efforts  in  that  department  of  theology  that  have  appeared 
in  our  own  times.2 

If  we  rest  satisfied  with  this  result,  and  I  verily  believe 
it  will  commend  itself  to  us   each  step  we 

1  Jtesitltx    of   the 

advance  forward  in  the  history,  we  have  aioie  consuiera- 
before  us,  to  speak  broadly  and  generally, 
the  record  of  the  circumstances  connected  with  three  jour- 
neys  to  or  toward  Jerusalem,  the  first  being  at  the  feast  of 
Tabernacles,  the  second  three  months  or  more  afterwards, 
the  last  a  short  time  before  the  ensuing  Passover.3 


fitcrov  Sdjuapeias  Kal  ra\i\aias,  where  the  confirmatory  liint supplied  by 
the  not  ice  of  the  direction  of  the  journey  should  not  be  overlooked.  See  below, 
p.  269,  note  5. 

l  The  following  appears  to  be  the  arrangement  of  this  able  harmonist  as  indi- 
cated in  his  Chronica  Temporwn(Vol.  ii.  p.  3Csq.  Roterod.  1680):  (1)  he  connects 
(sect.  67)  Luke  ix.  61  and  John  \  ii.  10;  (2)  he  places  (sect.  GO)  Luke  x.  17— xiii.  23 
before  John  ix.  1 — x.  42;  (3)  he  refers  Luke  xvii.  11  to  our  Lord's  last  journey  to 
Jerusalem,  connecting  it,  however,  with  John  x.  42  rather  than  with  John  xi. 
b'i.  See  sect.  02.  The  main  differences  between  this  and  the  view  adopted  in 
the  text  are  the  identification  of  Luke  xiii.  22  with  the  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  the 
feast  of  Dedication  (see  above,  p.  223,  note  3),  and  the  reference  to  John  ix.  1 — 
x.  21  to  the  \  i>it  at  the  feast  of  Dedication  rather  than,  as  seems  more  natural, 
to  that  at  the  least  of  Tabernacles,     ('ontiast  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops.  p.  329. 

-  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe  that  reference  is  here  made  to  the  ('hrn)io- 
logischt  Synapse  di  r  \"n  r  Evangelien  of  Kail  Wieseler,  —  a  treatise  of  which  the 
importance  has  been  already  commented  on.  See  p.  139,  note  4.  It  is  to  be 
regretted  that  in  a  few  important  passages  Wieseler  has  been  tempted  to  pro- 
pound novel  interpretations  (see  above,  p.  224,  note  1),  which  have  been  almost 
universally  pronounced  to  be  untenable.  This  has  led  hasty  readers  to  rate  this 
able  work  much  below  its  real  merits.  Compare  Kilto,  Journal  of  Sacr.  Lit.  for 
1850,  N".  xi.  p.  T-">. 

3  The  date  of  the  commencement  of  the  second  and  third  journeys  and  then- 
duration  can  only  be  fixed  roughly  and  approximately.  The  data  for  forming  a 
calculation  are  as  follow.  The  feast  of  the  Dedication  took  place  on  the  twent)  - 
fifth  of  Kislev  (Dec.  20),  and  lasted  eight  days  (Joseph,  Antiq.  xn.  7.  7;  compare 
Jahn,  Archaol.  j  869);  at  this,  as  we  know  from  St.  John,  our  Lord  was  present. 
Very  soon  afterwards  our  Lord  retires  to  the  Peraean  Bethany  (John  x.  40),  and 
there  abides  long  enough  for  many  to  believe  on  linn  (John  x.  42).  At  the  end 
of  this  stay  the  second  journey  towards  Jerusalem  (Luke  xiii,  22:  compare  John 
xi.  7)  is  commenced,  which  for  the  time  terminates  at  Bethany,  but  which, 


226  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VL 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  a  brief  but  orderly  recital  of  the 
recorded  events. 

The  last  circumstance  on  which  we  dwelt  was  the  return 
of  our  Lord  to  Capernaum  after  His  long 

Brief  stay  at  Ca-  ...  -      TT.    .    . 

pernawn .- worldly  missionary  journeys,  and  His  impressive 
Lo, ■£ brethren.'"     teaching  to  His  Apostles  during  that  brief 

period  of  apparent  tranquillity  and  seclusion.1 
That  time  of  holy  rest  seems  soon  to  have  come  to  an  end. 
The  feast  of  Tabernacles  was  nigh  at  hand,  and  the  Lord's 
brethren,2  who  now  come  prominently  before  us,  and  who, 
in  spite  of  their  practical  unbelief,'5  appear  to  have  dis- 
tinctly shared  in  similar  feelings  of  pride  and  expectancy 
to  those  which  we  seem  to  have  already  traced  in  the 
Apostles,  now  urge  Him  to  display  His  wonder-working 

powers  amid  circumstances  of  greater  pub- 

Johnvii.S.  x.  °  l 

licity,  —  to  challenge  and  to  command  adhe- 
sion, and  that   not   in  remote  Galilee,  but  in   the  busy 

owing  to  the  machinations  of  the  Jews  (John  xi.  47),  is  very  shortly  afterwards 
directed  to  Ephraim  (John  xi.  54).  From  this  place  the  third  journey  is  com- 
menced, which  appears  to  have  extended  through  Samaria,  Galilee,  and  Fersa, 
raid  to  have  been  temporarily  arrested  at  Bethany,  near  Jerusalem,  six  days 
before  the  Passover,  or,  in  the  year  in  question  (A.  u.  c.  783),  somewhere  about 
April  1.  If  we  now  reckon  backward,  and  assign  at  least  a  fortnight  to  this 
journey,  a  month  or  five  weeks  to  the  stay  at  Ephraim,  and  a  week  or  more  to 
the  second  journey,  —  which,  though  much  shorter  than  the  third,  seems  at  first 
to  have  been  leisurely  performed  (comp.  Luke  xiii.  22,  and  see  below,  p.  2C2, 
note  2),  —  we  shall  then  leave  about  a  month  or  five  weeks  for  the  stay  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  Peraean  Bethany.  The  second  journey,  according  to  this 
view,  would  have  commenced  about  the  beginning  of  February,  and  the  third 
about  the  middle  of  March. 

1  See  Lect.  v.  p.  213,  and  comp.  p.  218,  note  2. 

2  For  a  brief  consideration  of  the  probable  meaning  of  this  much  contested 
appellation,  see  above,  p.  100,  note  2,  and  for  examples  of  the  various  senses  of 
the  word  aSeAcpbs,  according  to  Hebrew  usage,  see  Greswell,  Dissert,  xvn.  Vol.- 
ii.  p.  117. 

8  That  the  words  oboe  iiriffTevov  (John  xiii.  5),  though  probably  implying  a 
disbelief  in  our  Lord*s  Godhead  (cos  els  &eou,  Euthym.),  did  not  imply  a  disbe- 
lief in  His  mighty  works,  and  perhaps  not  even  in  His  claims  to  be  regarded  a 
divinely  accredited  teacher,  seems  clear  from  the  context.  See  ver.  3,  and  com- 
pare Lect.  ill.  p.  101,  note.  Chrysostom  (i?l  he.)  rightly  remarks  that  the  address, 
though  marked  by  bitterness,  still  clearly  came  from  friends  {SoksI  rj  a^iccais 
Sr^ei/  (fuAcoz/  zlvai )  contrast  Euthym.  in  loc.).  We  may  pause,  however,  before 
we  agree  with  that  able  expositor  in  his  further  remark  that  James  the  brother 
of  the  Lord  was  one  of  the  speakers.  Compare  Greswell,  Dissert,  xvn.  Vol.  ii. 
p.  116. 


Lect.  VI.    THE   JOURN'EYIXGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  227 

thoroughfares  of  Jerusalem,1  and  among  the  thronging 
worshippers  in  its  temple  courts.  The  apparent  contra- 
diction that  has  here  been  found  between  our  Lord's  words 
and  His  subsequent  acts  vanishes  at  once  when  we  pause 
to  observe  that  here,  as  so  often  in  the  narrative  of  the 
fourth  Evangelist,  lie  is  revealed  to  us  as  the  reader  of  the 
heart,  and  as  answering  its  thoughts  and  imaginations, 
rather  than  the  words  by  which  those  feelings  were  dis- 
guised.2 It  is  to  the  spirit  and  meaning  of  this  worldly 
and  self-seeking  request,  rather  than  to  the  mere  outward 
terms  in  which  it  was  couched,  that  the  Lord  answers  His 
brethren,  even  as  He  had  once  before  answered  a  mother's 
tacit  importunity,  that  "His  time  is  not  yet 

r  *»  J  Jo/in  lit.  6. 

come,"  and    that    lie  goeth    not   up   to  the 
feast.     He  does  indeed  not  go  up  to  the  feast  in  the  sense 
in  which   those   carnal-minded   men   presumed  to  counsel 
Him.     lie  joins  now  no  festal  companies;  lie  takes  now 
no  prominent  part  in  festal  solemnities;8  if  lie  be  found  in 

1  The  exact  meaning  of  the  address  of  our  Lord's  brethren,  especially  of  the 
confirmatory  clause  (ouSels  yap  «V  Kpvnrtp  rt  ttoki  Kal  ^rjTe?  avrbs  if  irappri- 
aia  thai,  John  vii.  4),  is  not  at  first  Bight  perfectly  clear.  What  the  brethren 
appear  to  say  is  this :  "  (Jo  to  Judaea,  that  Thy  disciples,  whether  dwelling  there 
or  come  there  to  the  festival,  may  behold  the  works  which  Thou  art  doing  here 
in  comparative  secrecy  ;  it  is  needful  that  Thou  seek  this  publicity  if  true  to  Thy 
character,  lor  no  man  doeth  his  works  in  secret,  and  seeks  personally  (auToi)  to 
be  before  the  world,  as  Thou,  who  claiinest  to  be  the  Messiah,  must  necessarily 
desire  to  be.  Hidden  though  wondrous  works  and  personal  acceptance  by  the 
world  at  large  are  things  not  compatible."  The  whole  is  the  speech  of  shrewd 
and  worldly-minded,  but  not  treacherous  or  designing  men.  Compare  L'uckc  in 
loc.  Vol.  ii.  p.  189  (ed.  3). 

2  See  above,  Lect.  i.  p.  44,  note  3,  and  compare  p.  125,  note  2.  The  supposition 
of  Meyer,  that  our  Lord  here  states  His  intention  and  afterwards  alters  it,  is 
neither  borne  out  by  the  context  nor  rendered  admissible  by  any  parallel  case 
(Matt.  .\\  .  26  is  certainly  not  in  point)  in  the  whole  sacred  narrative.  The  mis- 
erable effort  of  Porphyry  to  fix  on  our  Lord  the  charge  of  fraudulent  represen- 
tations and  deliberate  inconstancy  is  noticed  and  refuted  by  Jerome,  COlltr. 
/■■  fag.  ii.  0. 

3  That  this  is  the  true  meaning  of  the  words  was  apparently  /  '/  by  the  earlier 
expositors  (<>v  yap  avajiaivti  <TvvsopTao-(i>v  i>ov$(Ti]0~biv  Si  jUaAAof,  Cyril  Alex. 
in  loo.  p.  104  !••)•  and  bat  been  distinctly  asserted  by  many  of  the  Bounder  modem 
writers.  8o  rightly  Lntbardt  ("  niohi  an  diesem  Feste  wird  er  so  wie  sie  n*  itten 
binauf-nnd  einsdehn  in  .Jerusalem"' — Das  Johanm  Evang.Y&ri  n.  p.  77),  S  tier 
( Disc,  qf  our  I  ord,  Vol.  r.  p.  242,  'lark),  and  somewhat  similarly,  LUcke  in  loo. 
The  explanation  of  Do  Wette  ami  Alford,  that  the  true  reading  uiiK  cba/3cu'ru>  is 


228  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

Jerusalem  and  in  the  courts  of  His  Father's  house,  it  is 
not  as  the  wonder-worker  or  Messianic  king,  but  as  the 
persecuted  Redeemer,  who  will  yet  again  brave  the  malice 
of  Scribe  and  Pharisee  that  He  may  still  fulfil  his  mission 
to  those  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  whom  the  festival 
may  gather  together. 

Thus  it  was,  that,  perhaps,  scarcely  before  the  very  day 

on  which  the  festival  actually  commenced,1 

journey  to  .rem-     oul.  Lord,  and,  as  the  sequel  seems  to  show, 

fnleiii   through    ba-  '  '  1  ' 

'""'•'"•  His  Apostles,  directed  their  steps  to  Jerusa- 

Comp.  Luke  ix.     \em,  but,  as  it  were,  in  secret.    Their  way,  as 

we  might  have  expected,  and  as  the  appar- 
ently coincident  notice  of  St.  Luke  distinctly  substantiates, 

lay    through  Samaria.2      But    Samaria   now 

Ch.  ix.  52. 

. .   . '  receives  not  this  Saviour  as  it  had  received 

John  iv.  40. 

Him  nine  months  before.  Then  the  Lord's 
face  was  turned  towards  Galilee,  now  it  is  turned  towards 


practically  equivalent  to  the  oviroi  avafialvco  of  the  received  text,  is  perhaps 
defensible  on  the  ground  that  the  succeeding  ovirai  may  he  thought  to  reflect  a 
kind  of  temporal  limitation  on  the  foregoing  negative,  but  seems  neither  so  sim- 
ple nor  so  natural  as  that  which  has  been  adopted  in  the  text. 

1  That  our  Lord  did  not  arrive  at  Jerusalem  till  the  middle  of  the  feast  is  cer- 
tainly not  positively  to  be  deduced  from  John  vii.  14,  which  may  only  imply  that 
up  to  that  day,  though  in  Jerusalem,  He  remained  in  concealment  (Meyer). 
Still  the  use  of  the  term  avefir],  especially  viewed  in  connection  with  its  use  a 
few  verses  before,  seems  to  involve  the  idea  of  a  preceding  journey,  and  may 
possibly  have  been  chosen  as  serving  to  imply  that  on  His  arrival  our  Lord  pro- 
ceeded at  once  to  the  Temple,  —  that  it  was,  in  fact,  the  true  goal  of  the  present 
journey.  Cyril  of  Alexandria  calls  attention  to  the  word  aviRr\  (oi>x  aw\u>s 
(tat]\^tv,  akAa  avdfiri,  (p7]aiu,  eis  rb  Upov,  in  loc.  p.  409  E),  but  apparently 
refers  it  to  the  solemn  and  formal  nature  of  the  entry. 

2  Even  if  we  hesitate  to  regard  the  journey  mentioned  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  ix.  51/ 
as  identical  with  that  here  specified  by  St.  John,  which,  indeed,  as  we  have 
shown  above,  we  seem  to  have  no  sufficient  reason  for  doing,  we  can  scarcely 
doubt  that  the  journey  was  through  Samaria.  By  this  route  our  Lord  would  be 
able  to  make  his  journey  more  completely  oos  iv  Kpvnr^  (John  vii.  10),  and 
would  also  apparently  be  able  to  reach  Jerusalem  more  quickly  than  if  He  bad 
taken  the  usual  and  longer  route  through  Peraea.  See  above,  Lecture  III.  p.  121, 
note  2.  The  assertion  of  Meyer  (in  loc),  that  ws  iv  Kpwrrtp  simply  implies  that 
our  Lord  joined  no  festal  caravan,  but  affords  no  indication  of  the  way  He  was 
pleased  to  take,  may  justly  be  questioned.  If  our  Lord  was  accompanied  by 
His  Apostles,  which,  from  St.  John's  Gospel  alone,  seems  certainly  more  proba- 
ble than  the  contrary,  could  a  company  of  thirteen  have  travelled  is  iv  Kpvmcp 
by  any  but  a  little-frequented  route? 


Lect.  VI.    THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  229 

Jerusalem;  then  His  journey  was  made  more  leisurely, 
now  it  is  in  haste ;  then  there  was  no  apparent  reason  why 
the  route  through  Samaria  had  been  chosen  rather  than 
any  other ;  now  it  is  self-evident.  The  peculiar  season  of 
the  year  at  once  reminds  the  jealous  Samaritan  whither 
those  hurried  steps  were  being  directed,  and  tells  him 
plainly  enough  "what  must  be  the  true  reason  which  now 
has  brought  that  hastening  company  through  their  com- 
monly avoided  land.     So  when  messengers 

J  .  °  Lake  ix.  52. 

are  sent  forward   to  expedite  the  journey, 

and  make  preparations  for  the  coming  Master,  He  whom 

the  city  of  Sychar  had  once  welcomed  is  now 

rejected   by  the  churlish  village  that  lay  in 

His  way.     The  Sons  of  Thunder1  would    have  had   fire 

called  down  from  heaven,  but  their  intemperate  zeal  is 

rebuked  by  their  Lord,  yea,  and  practically  rebuked  by  a 

striking  proof  that  even   now  Samaria   was   not   utterly 

faithless.     One   at  least,   there  seems  to  have  been,2  who 


i  The  incident  mentioned  in  this  passage  deserves  particular  attention  as  tend- 
ing to  correct  a  very  popular  and  prevailing  error  in  reference  to  the  character 
of  one  of  the  actors.  Does  the  present  passage,  especially  when  combined  with 
Luke  ix.  49  and  Mark  x.  38,  and  further  illustrated  by  the  most  natural  and 
obvious  interpretation  of  the  term  "  Son  of  Thunder"  (Mark  iii.  17;  see  Meyer 
in  loc.  p.  39,  at  all  justify  our  regarding  St.  John  as  the  apostolic  type  of  that 
almost  feminine  softness  and  meditative  tranquillity  (see  Olshausen,  Comment,  on 
the  Gospels,  Vol.  iii.  p.  304)  which  is  so  popularly  ascribed  to  him?  Is  it  not 
much  more  correct  to  say  that  the  notices  of  the  beloved  Apostle  recorded  in 
the  Gospels,  when  estimated  in  connection  with  the  name  given  to  him  by  his 
Master,  present  to  us  the  scarcely  doubtful  traces  of  an  ardent  love,  zeal,  and 
confidence  (Mark  x.  38),  which,  like  the  thunder  to  which  the  character  was 
compared,  was  sometimes  shown  forth  in  outspokenness  and  outburst?  This 
characteristic  ardor,  this  glowing  while  loving  zeal,  is  not  obscurely  evinced  in 
the  outspokenness  and  hones!  denunciation  of  falsehood  and  heresy  that  marks 
tin'  Brst,  and,  even  more  clearly,  the  short  remaining  epistles  of  this  inspired 
writer.  Compare  2  John  10,  3  John  10.  The  misconception  of  the  character  of 
the  Apostle  is  apparently  of  early  date,  and  perhaps  stands  in  some  degree  of 
connection  with  his  own  simple  yet  affecting  notice  of  the  love  and  confidence 
vouchsafed  towards  him  by  our  Redeemer  during  the  Last  Supper  (John  xiv. 
25).  Let  us  not  forget,  however,  thai  ho,  who  in  memory  of  this  was  lovingly 
called  6  (Trunridios  by  the  early  Church,  was  called  by  his  own  Master  the  "  Son 
of  Thunder."  The  patristic  explanation  of  this  latter  title  will  be  found  in  Sui- 
cer,  Thetamr,  s.  v.  /S^wrrj,  Vol.  i.  p.  712  sq.,  but  is  not  sufficiently  distinctive. 

'-  It  sci  ins  proper  lure  to  speak  with  caution,  as  the  present  case,  and  that  of 
the  man  who,  when  called  by  our  Lord,  requested  leave  first  to  go  and  bury  his 

20 


230  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

was  ready  to  cast  in  his  lot  with  that  travel-worn  company, 
and  to  him  it  was  answered  in  the  words  of 

Luke  ix.  57. 

our  text,  and  with  a  striking  and  pathetic 

appropriateness,  that  though  the  creatures  that  His  own 

divine  hands  had  made  had  their  allotted  j)laces  of  shelter 

and  rest,  "the  Son  of  Man  had  not  where  to  lay  His  head." 

The  Lord  soon  reaches  Jerusalem,  where  it  would  seem 

He  was  partially  expected,   and    about  the 

Our  Lord's  arri-  < 

rai  and  preaching     middle  of  the  feast  enters  the  Temple,  and 

at  Jerusalem.  ...  ,      , 

teaches  in  its  now  crowded  courts.    And  that 

John  vii.  11.  .  . 

teaching  was  not  in  vain.  Though  some  of 
the  mere  dwellers  in  Jerusalem1  paused  only  to  speculate 
on  the  policy  of  their  spiritual  rulers  in  permitting  One 

whom  thev  were  seeking  to  kill  now  to  speak 

John  vii.  25.  .  J  °  l 

with  such  openness  and  freedom,  the  effect 

on  the  collected  multitude  was  clearly  different.     Many, 

we  are  told,  believed  in  our  Lord  :  many  saw 

Ver.  SI.  ...  .  . 

in  His  miracles  an  evidence  of  a  Messiahship 

which  it  seemed  now  no  longer  possible  either  to  doubt 

or  to  deny.     The  sequel,  however,  we  might 

Jr'   '  easily  have  foreseen.     An   effort  is  at  once 

Ver.  32.  J 

made  by  the  party  of  the  Sanhedrin  to  lay 
hands  on  our  Lord,  but  is  frustrated,  perhaps  partly  by  the 


father,  are  placed  by  St.  Matthew  in  a  totally  different  connection.  See  ch.  xviii. 
19 — 21.  To  account  for  this  is  difficult,  though  we  can  have  no  difficulty  in  believ- 
ing that  it  could  be  readily  accounted  for  if  we  knew  all  the  circumstances.  It  is 
not,  for  example,  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  incident  of  the  self-offering 
follower  might  have  happened  twice,  and  that  St.  Matthew,  in  accordance  with 
his  habit  of  connecting  together  what  was  similar  (see  Lect.  I.  p.  35  sq.),  might 
have  associated  with  the  first  occurrence  of  that  incident  an  incident  which,  in 
point  of  time,  really  belonged  to  the  second. 

1  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  St.  John  here  places  before  us  the  views  and  com- 
ments of  a  party  that  clearly  must  be  regarded  as  different  from  the  general 
ox^os  (ver.  20)  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  more  hostile  'lov5a7oi  (ver.  15)  on  the 
other.  We  have  here  the  remarks  of  some  of  the  residents  in  the  city.  They 
evidently  are  perfectly  acquainted  with  the  general  designs  of  the  party  of  the 
Sanhedrin,  and  are  full  of  natural  wonder  that  they  should  have  permitted  this 
free  speaking  on  the  part  of  One  whom  they  had  resolved,  and  whom  it  was 
obviously  their  interest,  to  silence.  The  incidental  notice  of  the  sort  of  half 
knowledge  these  'IpoaoKv/xiTai  had  acquired  is  in  the  highest  degree  natural  and. 
characteristic.    See  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  v.  p.  267. 


Lect.  VI.     THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  231 

multitude,  and  certainly  also  in  great  measure  by  the 
convictions  of  the  very  men  that  were  sent  to  take  Him.1 
The  savage  spirit  of  the  Sanhcdrin  is  now,  however, 
distinctly  shown,  and  now  is  it  that  for  the  first  time 
publicly,  though  darkly,  the  Lord  speaks  of  that  depart- 
ure,—  of  that  "being  sought  for  and  not 
found,"  on  which  lie  had  already  spoken 
twice  before  to  His  disciples  with  such  saddening  explicit- 
iii'ss.  Yet  He  will  not  leave  those  heart-touched  multi- 
tudes that  were  now  hanging  on  His  words.  Yet  again,  on 
the  last  day  of  the  festival,  the  Lord  preaches 

•  r  Ver.  37. 

publicly,  with  a  most  solemn  and  appropriate 
reference  to  the  living  waters  of  the  Spirit  which  should 
flow  forth   when   He   was  glorified.2      Again   a  desire  is 
manifested  by  the  party  of  the  Sanhcdrin  to 

J  l  J  Ver.  H. 

lay  hands  on  Him ;  again,  as  it  would  seem, 

a  meeting  of  the  Sanhcdrin  is  held,  and  again  their  pro- 

1  This  transpires  afterwards.  See  John  vii.  45.  It  would  seem  that  when 
these  wrrjpeTai  were  sent  forth  with  orders  to  seize  our  Lord,  it  was  left  to  their 
discretion  to  watch  for  a  good  opportunity  and  a  reasonable  pretext.  At  the 
next  session  of  the  Sanhedriti  they  make  a  report  of  what  they  had  done,  or 
milier  left  undone,  and  are  exposed  accordingly  to  the  scornful  inquiries  and 
practical  censure  of  the  council  (ver.  47).  Further  proceedings,  it  would  seem, 
tn'  ;tt  present,  if  not  arrested,  yet  impeded  by  the  question  of  Xicodemus  (ver. 
61). 

'-'  There  seems  no  sufficient  reason  for  rejecting  the  generally  received  opinion, 
that  allusion  is  here  made  to  the  custom  of  bringing  water  from  the  well  of 
Siloam  and  pouring  it  on  the  altar,  which  appears  to  have  been  observed  on 
every  day  of  this  festival,  —  the  eighth  (according  to  R.  Judah  in  "Succah," 
iv.  9)  also  included.  See  especially  Lightfoot,  Hot.  Hebr.  in  loc.  Vol.  ii.  p.  632 
(Roterod.  1686),  and  the  good  article  in  Winer,  Ull'I).  "  Laubhuttenfest,"  Vol. 
ii.  p.  S.  Whether  this  ''great  day''  of  the  festival  is  to  be  regarded  as  the 
seventh  or  as  the  eighth  is  a  matter  of  some  doubt.  If  it  be  true,  as  urged  by 
Winer,  that  the  opinion  of  Rabbi  Judah  above  cited  is  only  that  of  an  indi- 
vidual, and  that  the  prevailing  practice  was  to  offer  libations  only  on  seven  days 
("Succah,"  iv.  1),  and  if  it  be  further  supposed  that  our  Lord's  words  were 
called  forth  by  the  actual  performance  of  the  rite,  then  "the  great  day  "  must 
!»■  the  seventh  day.  As,  however,  it  appears  from  the  written  law  that  the  eighth 
day  was  regarded  aa  a  Sabbath  (Lev.  xxiii.  86;  oomp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  m.  10. 4), 
and  as  peculiar  solemnities  are  specified  in  the  oral  law  as  celebrated  on  that  day 
(SCe  Lightfoot,  lOC.  tit.),  it  seems  more  correct  to  regard  the  eighth  as  "the  great 
day ;  "  and  if  it  be  conceded  that  there  was  no  libation  on  that  day,  to  suppose 
our  l. oid's  words  were  called  turth,  not  by  the  act  ItBelf,  hut  by  a  remembrance 
of  the  custom  observed  on  the  preceding  days.  See  Meyer  in  loc.  p.  289  (ed.  3) 
and  the  elaborate  comments  of  Lilokc,  Vol.  ii.  p.  228  sq.  (ed.  3). 


232  THE   JOURNEYLNGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

posals  are  encountered  by  a  just  opposition  ;  not,  however, 
on  this  occasion  by  the  tacit  and  merely  passive  opposition 
of  their  reluctant  satellites,  but  by  the  open  pleading  of 
one  of  its  most  important  members,  the  timid  yet  faithful 
Nicodemus,1 —  the  only  one  anions  the  rulers 

Ver.Sl.  J  ° 

of  the  Jews  who  was  found  to  urge  the 
observance  of  that  law  of  Moses  which  its  hypocritical 
guardians  were  now  seeking  to  pervert  or  to  violate. 

To  this  same  period,  if  we  conceive  the   narrative  in 

question  to  be  written  by  St.  John,  must  be 

me  woman  taien     assigned  the  memorable  and  most  certainly 

in  adulter?/ :  prnha-        ... 

tie  place  of  the  m-     inspired  history  of  the  woman  taken  in  adul- 

cident  in  the  Gospel  ,  x 

history.  tery ;    but  as  1  venture  to  entertain,  some- 

what decidedly,  the  opinion  that  it  was  not 
written  by  that  Evangelist,2  and  that  it  does  not  in  any 
way  blend  naturally  with  the  present  portion  of  the  Re- 
deemer's history,  I  will  not  here  pause  on  it,  but  will  only 
notice  in  passing  the  great  plausibility  and  historical  fitness 
with  which  three  or  four  of  the  cursive  manuscripts  insert 
it  at  the  end  of  the  twenty-first  chapter  of  St.  Luke.3 


1  Compare  Lect.  in.  p.  124,  note  3,  ad  fin. 

2  The  limits  and  general  character  of  these  notes  wholly  preclude  our  attempt- 
ing to  enter  upon  a  formal  discussion  of  this  difficult  question.  It  may  be  briefly 
observed,  however,  that  the  opinion  expressed  in  the  text  rests  on  the  following' 
considerations:  (l)the  absenceof  the  passage  from  —  (a) threeoutof  thefour  first- 
class  MSS.  and  the  valuable  MS.  Marked  L;  (b)  several  ancient  versions,  amonp 
which  are  some  early  Latin  versions  of  great  importance,  and  apparently  the 
Peshito-Syriac;  (c)  several  early  and  important  patristic  writers,  Origen,  Tertul- 
lian,  Cyprian,  and  Chrysostom  being  of  the  number:  (2)  The  striking  number  of 
variations  of  reading  among  the  documents  that  retain  the  passage,  there  being  not 
less  than  eighty  variations  of  reading  in  one  hundred  and  eighty -three  words :  (3) 
The  almost  equally  striking  difference  of  style,  both  in  the  connecting  particles 
and  other  words,  from  that  of  St.  John,  and  the  apparent  similarity  in  style  to 
that  of  St.  Luke.  From  these  reasons,  external  and  internal,  we  seem  justi- 
fied in  removing  the  passage  from  the  place  it  now  occupies  in  the  received  text, 
though  there  appears  every  reason  for  believing  it  a  portion  of  the  Gospel  his- 
tory. It  cannot  be  too  strongly  impressed  on  the  general  reader  that  no  reason- 
able critic  throws  doubt  on  the  incident,  but  only  on  its  present  place  in  the 
sacred  narrative.  For  critical  details  see  the  new  (7th)  edition  of  Tischendorf  s 
Greek  Test.  Vol.  i.  p.  602,  and  Meyer,  Komineiit.  iib.  J  oh.  p.  247  (ed.  3). 

3  These  manuscripts  are  numbered  13,  69,  124,  346;  one  of  these  (69)  being  the 
well-known  Codex  Leicestrensis,  and  the  other  three  MSS.  of  the  Alexandrian 
family.    It  cannot  apparently  be  asserted  that  the  passage  exactly  fits  on  after 


Lect.  VI.     THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  233 

But  the  Lord  still  lingers  at  Jerusalem  in  spite  of  the 
vengeful  storm  that  was  fast  gathering  round 
Him.     To  the  first  Sabbath  after  the  festival    J£%££* 
we  must  apparently1  assign  the  discourse  on     ^'"'-'a'c»'- 

II  J  O  John  vui.  12—20. 

His  own  and  His  Father's  testimony,  and  the 

striking  declarations  of  His  mission  from  Him  that  was 

true,   and    of    His    union    with   the    eternal 

Ver.  25  sq. 

Father,  —  declarations   which  we   know   so 

"wrought  upon  our  Lord's  very  opponents  that  many  of 

them,2  as  St.  John  tells  us,  believed  on  Him  as  He  thus 

spake  unto  them,  though,  alas,  as  the  sequel 

Beems  to  show,  that  belief  was  soon  exchanged         J*"' 

'  ~  Ver.  33. 

for  captious  questioning,  and  at  last  even  for 

the  frightful  violences  of  blinded  religious  zeal.     To  this 

same  Sabbath  we  must  certainly  assign  the 

performance  of  the  deeply  interesting  miracle 

of  giving  sight  to  the  beggar3  who  had  grown  up  to  man- 


Luke  xxi.  88,  but  it  certainly  does  seem  rightly  attached  to  that  chapter  gen- 
erally, and  properly  to  find  a  place  among  the  incidents  there  related.  See  more 
in  Lect.  vii. 

1  It  may  be  doubted  whether  we  are  to  assign  the  discourses  recorded  by  St. 
John  .in  ch.  viii.  to  the  last  day  of  the  feast  of  Tabernacles  (John  vii.  37),  or  to 
the  Sabbath  on  which  the  blind  man  was  healed  (John  x.  14).  The  latter  appears 
to  be  the  more  probable  connection.  The  beginning  of  ch.  ix.  seems  closely 
linked  with  the  concluding  verse  of  chap.  viii.  —  a  chapter  which  really  com- 
mences with  ver.  12,  and  contains  the  record  of  a  series  of  apparently  continuous 
discourses.  Compare  Origen,  in  Joann.  xix.  2,  Vol.  iv.  p.  292  (ed.  Bened.). 
Between  this  chapter  and  the  close  of  ch.  vii.  there  seems  a  break,  which  in  the 
received  text  is  filled  up  with  the  narrative  of  the  woman  taken  in  adultery. 
On  the  connection  of  this  portion,  see  Wieseler,  Chron.  Si/nops.  p.  329,  and  com- 
pare the  remarks  of  Meyer,  Komment.  Ub.Jok.  p.  289  sq.  (ed.  3),  —  who,  however, 
does  not  seem  correct  in  separating  John  viii.  21  sq.  from  what  precedes,  and  in 
assigning  the  discourse  to  a  following  day. 

2  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  Evangelist  seems  desirous  that  it  should  be 
clearly  observed  that  the  ttoAAoJ  who  believed  (John  viii.  30)  belonged  to  the 
hostile  party,  the  'Iowfcuoi  (see  p.  116,  note3),  as  he  specially  adds  that  the  address 
beginning  ch.  viii.  81  was  directed  irpbs  tovs  TrfwiffTeuKdras  o.vtu>  'lovdaiovs. 
(>n  the  whole  discourse  and  the  melancholy  fluctuations  in  the  minds  of  these 
sad);  imperfect  believers,  see  the  exceedingly  good  comments  of  Stier,  Disc,  of 
Our  Lord,  Vol.  iv.  p.  319  sq.  (Clark). 

3  See  John  ix.  8,  where  the  true  reading  seems  undoubtedly,  not  '6ti  t  v<p\b s 
^v(r.ec),  but  on  ir po<rair-i)s  fy,  which  lias  the  support  of  the  four  principal 
MSS.,    Hi''   Byriao,    Latin,   Coptic,   and   other   ancient    versions,  and    is    rightly 

1   by   in... i   recent   editors.     On  the   miracle   itself,  the  characteristics  of 
20* 


234  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

hood    in  blindness,  and    who  believed  in,  yea,  and  wor- 
shipped as  the  Son  of  God,  Him  by  whose 
oinix.   sq.         merciful  hands  he  received  his  sioht.3     With 

Ver.38.  _  _  & 

the   sublime    discourse  on   the   Good    Shep- 
sq.  herd,  —  the  Good  Shepherd  that  even  now, 

Comp.ch.  mil. 59.  L 

with  stones  every  moment  ready  to  be  cast 
upon  Him,  was  giving  His  very  life  for  His  sheep,  —  the 
memorable  occurrences  on  this  eventful  Sabbath 2  and 
during  our  Lord's  present  stay  in  Jerusalem  appear  to 
have  come  to  their  close.  At  no  preceding  festival  had 
our  Lord  made  a  deeper  impression  on  the  minds  of  those 
whom  He  had  vouchsafed  to  address.  At  no  former  visit 
was  such  an  effect  produced  on  the  feelings,  not  only  of  the 

more  friendly  multitudes,  but  even  of  open 

Ch.  vii.  31, 40.  tic  Ixi.  C 

Comp.  ch.vu.is.     or  concealed  foes,  and  that,  too,  as  far  as  we 

contract  John  a.     can  infer  from  the  inspired  narrative,  not  so 

much  by  mighty  works,  as  by  powerful  and 

persuasive  teaching.     All  seem  alike  to  have  felt,  and  in 

some  degree  alike  to  have  yielded  to,  the  influence  of  the 

gracious  words  that  proceeded  from  the  Redeemer's  mouth. 

which  are,  our  Lord's  being  pleased  to  impart  His  healing  powers  by  an  outward 
medium  (ver.  5),  a  deferred  (comp.  Mark  viii.  23)  or  rather  suspended  cure,  and 
its  divinely  ordered  dependence  on  the  sufferer's  performance  of  a  prescribed 
act  (2  Kings  v.  10), — see  the  comments  of  Cyril  Alex,  and  Chrysostom,  in  loc, 
August.  inJoann.  Tractat.  xliv.,  Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  iv.  8,  and  Trench,  Notes 
on  the  Miracles,  p.  288. 

1  Some  modern  expositors  endeavor  to  dilute  the  nature  of  the  blind  man's 
belief  in  our  Lord  as  the  "  Son  of  God."  Why,  however,  are  we  to  say  that  this 
title  must  have  had  a  theocratic  (Meyer)  rather  than  a  Christian  meaning  to  the 
mind  of  the  recent  sufferer,  when  it  is  so  possible,  and  even  so  probable,  from  his 
conduct  before  the  Pharisees,  that  He  who  had  given  light  to  his  bodily  eye  had 
vouchsafed  a  special  illuminating  influence  (see  Euthym.  in  loc.)  to  the  inner  eye 
of  the  mind?  What  else  are  we  to  understand  from  his  prompt  act  of  accepted 
adoration  than  a  recognition  of  the  divine  nature  of  Him  before  whom  be  was 
standing?  As  Augustine  well  says,  "  Agnoscit  cum  non  tilium  hominis  tantum, 
quod  ante  crediderat,  sed  jam  filium  Dei  qui  carnem  susceperat."  —  InJoann. 
Tractat.  xliv.  15,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1718  (ed.  Migne).  On  the  meaning  ascribed  to  the 
title  "  Son  of  God,"  compare  Lect.  in.  p.  119,  note  2,  Lect.  V.  p.  196,  note  1. 

2  Some  expositors  place  an  interval  of  one  or  more  days  after  John  ix.  34,  and 
before  John  x.  1  (see  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  v.  pp.  445,  448),  and  so  extend 
the  events  over  a  greater  space  of  time.  This  may  be  so;  but  the  above  assump- 
tion, that  all  took  place  on  the  Sabbath  mentioned  ch.  ix.  14,  seems  on  the  whole 
rather  more  in  accordance  with  the  general  tenor  of  the  text. 


Lect.  VI.    THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  235 

The  impression  was  general ;  the  testimony  all  but  unani- 
mous. The  mixed  multitude,  the  dwellers  at  Jerusalem, 
the    officials    of  the    Temple,   and   to   some       _    ..  „, 

1  Ch.  vu.  25. 

extent  even   the   hostile   Jewish   party,  bore     ■  r«r.*6. 

.  ,  i  n  Ch.  viii.  30. 

witness  to   the   more   than   mortal  power  or 
the  teaching  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

Whither  our  Lord  now  went  is  not  specified,  and  must 
remain  only  a  matter  of  conjecture.     It  may 

Departure   from 

be   remarked,  however,   that   the    silence  of    jemaaUmcmdmbh 

_.        _    ,  ,  .       .      , .  ,  tion  of  the  Seventy. 

St.  John,  who  commonly  indicates  whenever 
our  Lord's  ministry  was  transferred  from  Judsea,  seems  to 
give  us  very  good  grounds  for  supposing  that  our  Lord,  as 
once  before,  after  His  first  passover,  so  now  again,  remained 
still   within    the    frontier    of  Judaea,    and   again    partially 
resumed  a  ministry  there  which  had  been  suspended  in 
the  December  of  the  preceding  year.     If  this  be  so,  it  is 
to  this  country,  and  apparently  also  to  this  period,1  that 
we  must  refer  the  sending  forth  of  the  seventy  disciples, — 
those  seventy  Whose  very  number  hinted  at 
the  future  destination  of  the  Gospel  for  the 
wide  world   and  the  seventy  nations  into  which  the  Jews 
divided  it,2  even  as  the  mission  of  the  twelve  Apostles  not 
obscurely  hinted  at  the  first  offer  of  the  Gospel  to  the  now 
merged  twelve  tribes  of  God's  own  peculiar  people. 


Tlie  ox:>ot  period  of  the  mission  of  the  Seventy  lias  been  mueli  debated  by 
harmonists  of  this  portion  of  Scripture.  Wieseler  fixes  it  as  during  the  journey 
through  Samaria,  and  finds  a  special  appropriateness  in  the  choice  of  that  coun- 
try. Bee  Climnril.  Stjnops.  p.  320,  note.  As,  however,  the  journey  through 
Samaria  was  apparently  in  haste,  and  as  the  whole  of  Luke  x.  seems  to  refer  io 
events  which  succeeded  that  journey  (comp.  De  Wettc,  in  loc),  the  place  here 
■  1  to  the  mission  is  perhaps  more  probable. 
-  Bee  Eisenmenger,  Entd.  Judenthv/m,  Vol.  ii.  p.  786  sq.,  and  especially  the 
interesting  Rabbinical  citations  io  Lightfoot  {Hor.  Hebr.  in  Joann.  \  ii  37).  which 
•ac  may  further  use  as  indirectly  confirming  our  present  ohronological  arrange- 
ment. If  the  custom  alluded  to  in  those  passages,  of  offering  sacrifices  at  the 
feast  of  Tabernacles  for  the  seventy  nations  of  the  heathen  world,  was  as  old  as 
the  time  of  our  Ba\  lour,  — and  this  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt,— ii  does  not 
■eem  wholly  fanciful  to  connect  this  mission  of  seventy  men,  whose  distillation, 
though  not  defined,  does  nol  at  any  rate  appear  to  lun  e  had  any  specified  limits 
assigm  il  to  it  (OOUtrasl  Malt.  x.  .0),  with  a  period  shortly  succeeding  a  festival 
where  the  needs  of  the  heathen  world  were  not  forgotten  even  by  the  Jews. 


236  THE   JOURXEYINGS    TOWARD    JERUSALEM.     Lect.  VI. 

During  this   same  period  —  this  interval  between   the 
feast  of  Tabernacles  and   the  feast  of  the 

Further  incidents       -*-*      -..       , .  .  .    ■  .  -.         ,  , 

tnjudma  recorded     Dedication  —  we  may  also,  with  considerable 
*'     „  probability,  place  the  visit  of  our  Lord    to 

Luke  x.  38.  *  *  '    • 

Martha  and  Mary  at  Bethany,  when  Martha 
was  so  cumbered  with  much  serving;  and  to  this  same 
interval  may  we  assign  that  instructive  series  of  discourses1 
which  extend  from  the  middle  of  the  tenth  to  the  middle 
of  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  St.  Luke,  the  few  incidents 
connecting  which  seem  admirably  to  agree  with  the  ar- 
rangement that  would  refer  them  to  Judaea  and  to  this  par- 
ticular period  of  our  Lord's  ministry.2  Though  devoid  of 
all  notices  of  place  3  which  might  enable  us  to  give  some 
circumstantial  touches  to  the  few  interspersed  incidents,  or 
sketch  them  out  in  a  connected  narrative,  they  still  serve 
to  show  us  very  clearly,  on  the  one  hand,  that  the  effect 
produced  by  our  Lord's  present  ministry  in  Judaea  was  very 
great,  that  His  hearers  were  now  unusually  numerous,  and 
showed  as  earnest  a  desire  to  hear  the  words  of  life  as  was 


1  This  interesting  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  opens  with  the  parable  of  the 
good  Samaritan  (ch.  x.  25  sq.)  and  closes  with  the  miracle  performed  on  the 
woman  bowed  by  a  spirit  of  infirmity  (ch.  xiii.  10 — 17).  The  two  striking  para- 
bles of  the  rich  fool  (ch.  x.  16  sq.)  and  the  barren  fig-tree  (ch.  xiii.  6  sq.)  belong 
to  this  period,  and  present  the  characteristics  of  so  many  of  the  parables  recorded 
by  St.  Luke,  viz.  that  of  springing  from  or  being  suggested  by  some  preceding 
event.    See  Da  Costa,  The  Four  Witnesses,  p.  211  sq. 

2  The  healing  of  the  two  blind  men  (Matt.  ix.  27  sq.)  is  inserted  by  Teschendorf 
(Synops.  Evang.  p.  xxxix.)  in  the  present  portion  of  the  narrative,  on  the 
ground  that,  according  to  St.  Matthew,  it  stands  in  close  connection  with  the 
cure  of  a  deaf  and  dumb  demoniac  (ver.  32  sq.),  which  again,  according  to  Luke 
xi.  14  sq.,  must  belong  to  the  present  period  of  the  history.  On  the  whole,  how- 
ever, it  seems  better  to  conceive  that  the  incident  of  curing  a  deaf  and  dumb 
demoniac,  and  the  blasphemy  it  evoked  (Matt.  ix.  34,  Luke  xi.  15),  happened 
twice,  than  to  detach  Matt.  ix.  27  sq.  so  far  from  the  period  to  which  it  certainly 
seems  to  belong.  The  blasphemous  comment  might  well  have  been  first  made 
by  the  Tharisees  (Matt.  ix.  34),  and  then  afterwards  have  been  imitated  and  reit- 
erated by  others.  Compare  Luke  xi.  15,  where  observe  that  the  speakers  are  not 
defined. 

3  Compare  ch.  x.  38,  where  even  the  well-known  Bethany  [GreswelTs  argu- 
ments (Dissertation  xxxn.)  against  this  identification  seem  wholly  invalid] 
is  no  more  nearly  defined  than  as  a  kw/.i?j  tis.  Compare  also  ch.  xi.  1,  iv 
T<j>  elval  iv  t(5jto>  tivi,  xiii  10,  iv  /Uta  twv  o-jvaywyuiv,  and  see  above,  p.  20G, 
note  2. 


Llct.  VI.    THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  237 

ever  shown  even  in  Galilee;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  that 

the  enmity  of  the  Pharisees  and  hierarchical 

party  was  deepening  in  its  implacability, —     eomp.eh.xt.ia. 

and  that  more  especially  as  onr  Lord  did  not        «<•"..■,;,.,. 

i  «  See  ver.  3'J  sq. 

now  repress  His  solemn  and  open  denun- 
ciations of  the  hypocrisy  and  bloodthirsty  spirit  of  these 
miserable  and  blinded  men.  The  last  incident  of  the 
period  in  question,  the  cure,  on  a  Sabbath  day,  of  a  woman 
weakened  and  bowed  down  by  demoniacal  influence,1 
brings  both  parties  very  clearly  before  us,  the 
adversaries  and  their  shamed  silence,  and  the        _    „ 

'  l  er.  17. 

people,  that,  as  the  Evangelist  tells  us,  "re- 
joiced for  all  the  glorious  things"  that  were  done  by  their 
great  Healer. 

At  the  end  of  this  two-month  ministry  in  Judaea,  and, 
as  computation  seems  to  warrant  our  saying, 
about  the  20th  of  December,-  St.  John  dis-     to  Jerusalem  at  the 

.,       ,,  w^ii  ti  i-         Jeastof Dedication. 

tinctly  specifies  that  our  Lord  was  present  in 

Jerusalem  at  the  annual  festival  which  commemorated  the 
purification  and  re-dedication  of  the  Temple  under  Judas 
Maccabeus.3    Though  threatened  by  every  form  of  danger, 


1  This  miracle,  it  may  be  observed,  also  took  place  in  a  synagogue  (Luke  xiii. 
1  i).  :incl  in  this  respect  was  the  counterpart  in  Judaea  of  the  similar  healings  on 
the  Babbatb  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum  (Mark  i.  21  sq.,  Luke  iv.  31  sq. ;  and 
Matt.  \ii.  9  sq.,  Mark  iii.  1  sq.,  Luke  vi.  G  sq.).  On  the  first  occasion  we 
find  no  expression  of  complaint  or  indignation;  on  the  second  occasion,  evil 
thoughts  arc  at  work,  but  no  demonstration  is  made;  here,  however,  the  ruler 
of  the  Bynagogue  himself  interposes  and  addresses  the  multitude  in  terms  spe- 
cially intended  t.>  relied  censure  on  our  Lord  (ver.  14).  On  the  miracle  itself, 
the  peculiar  nature  of  which  was  the  removal  of  a  contraction  of  the  body,  pro- 
duced by  demoniacal  influence  (ver.  lGj^that  had  continued  as  long  as  eighteen 
years,  see  Augustine,  Srrm.  ex.  Vol.  v.  p.  G33  sq.  (ed  Migne),  Hook,  Serm.  on  the 
Minifies,  Vol.  ii.  p.  102,  and  Trench,  Notes  on  the  if  trades,  p.  324. 

n  The  feast  of  Dedication  regularly  commenced  on  the  twenty-fifth  of  Chisler. 

Thai  date  in  I  he  J  ear  we  are  now  considering  |  a.  t'.  C.  Tffi)  Will  coincide,  accord- 
ing to  the  tallies  of  Wuiin  and  Wieseler,  with  Tuesday.  December  20.  See 
Chron.  Synopa.  p.  4*1.  or  Teschendorf,  Synops.  Evang.  p.  i.n. 

■i  This  festival,  more  fully  specified  in  the  Books  of  Maccabees  as  6  eyKaivia^hs 
rod  SvaicuTTrip'iou  |1  Mace.  iv.  56,  69),  o  Ka^apta/ubs  tov  vaov  (2  Mace.  x.  6),  and 
further  distinguished  by  the  name  (puna,  in  consequence,  according  to  JosephuS 
[Alliiq.  XII.  7.  7),  of  Unlooked-for  deliverance,  was  instituted  by  Judas  Macca- 
beus alter  his  victories  over  the  generals  of  Antiochus  Epiphases,  and  designed 


238  THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

the  Good  Shepherd  yet  went  once  again,  as  His  own  divine 
words  seem  partially  to  suggest,  to  tend  His  sheep,  —  the 
sheep  which  heard  His  voice  and  had  been  given  to  Him 
by  that  eternal  Father  with  whom  Pie  now  solemnly  and 
explicitly  declared  Himself  to  be  one.     He 

John  x.  30.  L  J 

who  but  a  few  months  before,  in  the  remote 

uplands  of  Galilee,  had  commanded  His  disciples  not  to 

divulge  His  Messiahship,  now  in  Solomon's 

Matt.  xvi.  20.  a  .  . 

porch1  and  in  the  face  of  bitter  foes  pro- 
claims His  divinity ;  He  who  even  now  vouchsafed  not 
fully  to  answer  the  question  of  the  excited  people  whether 

He  were  the  Christ  or  no,  nevertheless  avows 

John  x.  24,  25. 

before  all  men  that  He  is  the  Son  of  God.2 
That  title  which  to  the  misbelieving  Jew  would  have 
been  but  the  symbol  of  earthly  and  carnal  hope  or  the 
watchword  of  sedition,  He  merges  in  the  higher  designa- 


te commemorate  the  purification  of  the  temple  after  its  pollution  by  that  frantic 
and  cruel  man  (1  Mace.  i.  20,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xn.  5.  4).  It  lasted  eight  days,  and 
appears  to  have  been  a  time  of  great  festivity  and  rejoicing.  See  Otho,  Lex. 
fiabbin.  p.  238  sq.,  and  Lightfoot,  Ho?-.  Hebr.  in  Joann.  x.  22,  where  quotations 
are  given  from  the  Mishna  which  seem  to  show  that  the  practice  of  illuminating 
the  city  during  the  festival,  and  perhaps  also  the  title  (poora,  was  derived  from  a 
legendary  account  of  a  miraculous  multiplication  of  pure  oil  for  lighting  the 
sacred  lamps,  which  occurred  at  the  first  celebiatiou  of  the  festival.  See,  how- 
ever, Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Kirchweihfest,"  Vol.  i.  p.  659. 

1  The  comment  xellJL^v  ^v  (cn-  x-  22),  which  St.  John  prefixes  to  his  notice  of 
the  exact  locality  in  which  our  Lord  then  was,  seems  designed  to  remind  the 
reader  why  He  was  pleased  to  select  this  covered  place  ("  ut  captaret  calorem," 
Lightfoot)  rather  than  the  open  courts  in  which,  it  would  seem,  He  more  usually 
taught  the  multitudes.  Compare  Winer,  RWIi..  Art.  "Tempel,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  586. 
The  porch,  or  cloister  in  question,  we  learn  from  Joscphus  (Antiq.  xx.  9.  7).  was 
on  the  east  side  of  the  temple,  —  hence  also  known  by  the  name  of  the  aroa 
araToMicr),  —  and  appears  to  have  been  a  veritable  portion  of  the  ancient  temple 
of  Solomon,  which  either  wholly  or  in  part  escaped  when  the  rest  of  the  build- 
ing was  burnt  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  2  Kings  xxv.  9  (Joseph.  Antiq.  x.  8.  5).  It 
formed  one,  and  that  apparently  the  most  splendid,  of  the  noble  cloisters  which 
surrounded  the  temple  enclosure.  See  Lightfoot,  Descr.  Templi,  cap.  8,  Vol.  i. 
p.  565  (Roterod.  1686). 

2  On  this  title,  which  here,  as  in  other  places,  has  been  explained  away  by 
many  recent  writers,  see  the  following  note,  and  compare  above,  p.  119,  note  2, 
and  p.  196,  note  1.  Some  good  comments  on  this  particular  passage  will  be 
found  in  Wilson,  Tllustr.  of  the  N.  T.  ch.  ii.  p.  37  sq.,  and  a  defence  of  the  true 
meaning  of  the  title  in  opposition  to  Dorner,  in  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol  v. 
p.  496  sq. 


Lect.  VI.    THE   JOURNT.YIXOS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  2oP 

tion  that  betokened  His  eternity  and  Godhead.1  We  can 
perhaps  scarcely  wonder  at  what  followed.  If,  nine  months 
before,  at  the  feast  of  Purim,  the  same  bitter  and  preju- 
diced men   had  sought  to  kill  our  Lord  for 

0  John  v.  18. 

claiming  to  be  the  Son  of  God  ;  if  again,  at  the 

recent  feast  of  Tabernacles,  the  declaration  of  an  existence 

before  Abraham   had  made  them  snatch  up 

•  11  11  Vh-  '''"•  ■"''''• 

stones  to  cast  at  Hun,  it  could  scarcely  be 
otherwise  now,  when  the  eternal  Son  was  claiming  a  one- 
ness  of  essence    with    the    eternal    Father. 

Ch.  x.  30. 

Savage  hands  soon   take  up  the  stones  that 

lay   around    those   ancient  cloisters;2    wild  voices  charge 

the  Holy  One  with  blasphemy.     With  blas- 

ii  i  /•  ci      •  Paabnlxxxii.9. 

phemy  !  when  the  very  language  of  Scripture 

proved  that  Shiloh  was  only  laying  claim  to  prerogatives 

and  titles  that  were  verily  His  own.     Blas- 

J  .  John  x.  3C. 

pheiny !  when  the  very  works  to  which  our 

Lord  appealed    were    living    proofs   that   lie   was   in    the 

Father,  and  the  Father  in   Him.      But  the 

Vcr.rs. 

hearts  of  those  wretched  men  were  hardened, 

and  their  ears  could  not  hear.     Fain  would  they  have  used 

the   stones  they  were  now  holding  in  their  hands  ;8  fain 


i  The  nopular  assumption  that  the  term  ''Son  of  God"  was  regarded  by  the 
Jews  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  as  one  of  the  appropriate  titles  of  the  Messiah,  is 
carefully  investigated  by  Wilson  in  the  work  referred  to  above  (chap.  iv.  p. 56 
sq  I,  and  the  conclusion  arrived  at  is  stated  as  follows:  "  With  no  direct  testi- 
mony whatever  on  one  side,  and  with  the  testimony  of  Origen  [contr.  Cels.  i.  p. 
88,  id.  Spencer),  supported  by  a  strong  body  of  probable  evidence  deduced  from 
the  New  Testament,  on  the  other,  it  seems  necessary  to  conclude  that  custom  had 
not  appropriated  this  title  to  the  Messiah  of  the  Jews  near  the  time  of  Jesus 
Christ."— Ithutr.  <■/  X.  '/'.  p.  74. 

-  The  idle  question,  how  stones  would  be  found  in  BUCh  a  locality,  may  be  most 
easily  disposed  of  by  observing,  not  only  that  general  repairs  and  restoration  in 
and  about  the  temple  \\vr\-  going  on  to  a  considerable  extent  until  after  the  time 
of  our  Lord  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xx.9.7;  compart'  Lightfoot,  Bar.  Ttebr.  VoL ii.  p. 
688),  bul  that  these  verj  cloisters  had  not  improbably  suffered  greatly  in  the  Are 
during  the  revolt  against  Sabinue  (  Intig.  svn.  10. 2),  and  might  not  even  yet 
have  been  completely  restored.    At  any  rate,  a  proposal  was  made  to  rebuild 

them  In  the  ti if  Agrippa  {Antiq.  jr..  9.  7;.    lor  an  account  of  stones  being 

freely  used  in  an  uproar  in  the  temple-courts,  see    intiq.  xvn.  9.  3. 

We  seem  Justified  In  pressing  the  present  tense  (oia  irolov  aliToiv  tpyov  /.te 
\l&af«Ts;   John  x.32);   the.  Jews  had  taken  np  stones,  and  were  standing 


240  THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

would  they  have  seized  on   their  Redeemer,  and   carried 

out,  even   where   they  were,  their  lawless   and   impious 

designs,  when  that  Holy  One  at  once  left  both  the  temple 

and  the  city,  and  withdrew  to  those  secluded 

John  x.  40. 

districts  across  the  Jordan  where  the  BajDtist 

had  commenced  his  ministry.1    There  the  Lord  found  both 

faith  and  reception,  and  there,  as  it  would 

,"""   '...  „         seem,  He  vouchsafed  to  abide  until  the  com- 

Luke  xiti.  32.  ' 

mencement  of  His  second    and  subsequent 

journey  to  Bethany  and  to  the  neighborhood  of  Jerusalem. 

But   even    in   those   secluded    districts   hypocrisy    and 

malice  soon  found  an  opportunity  for  cooper- 
J??to'£2£Z  ation«  After  our  Lord  had  now,  as  it  would 
preparation      to     seem  commenced  His  iourney  towards  Jeru- 

leave   reraza.  '  v  « 

salem,  and  as  His  steps  were  leading  Him 
perhaps  through  one  of  the  Peraean  villages  or  towns  in 
the  neighborhood   of  His  former  abode,2  Pharisees  come 


ready  to  carry  out  their  blinded  impiety.  Compare  Winer,  Gram.  §  40.  2,  p.  237 
(ed.  6).  Stier  {Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  v.  p.  494,  Clark)  contrasts  the  e^daracrav 
Kirovs  in  the  present  case  with  the  r/pav  Ai&ovs  in  ch.  viii.  59,  urging  that  the 
former  word  marks  a  more  deliberate  rolling  up  of  larger  stones,  the  latter  a 
more  hasty  and  impetuous  snatching  up  of  any  stones  that  chanced  to  lie  in 
their  way.  The  explanation  of  -fjpav  may  possibly  be  correct;  but  the  ifidtrra- 
G&v  seems  rather  to  imply,  what  the  context  seems  to  confirm,  both  the  act  of 
taking  up  the  stones,  and  also  that  of  holding  them  in  their  hands,  so  as  to  be 
ready  for  use. 

1  For  a  rough  estimate  both  of  the  time  (four  or  five  weeks)  which  our  Lord 
may  be  supposed  to  have  now  spent  in  Persia,  and  of  the  date  of  the  commence- 
ment of  the  second  journey,  see  above,  p.  225,  note  3.  The  place,  we  may 
observe,  is  particularly  specified,  as  "  where  John  at  first  baptized  "  (John  x. 
40),  i.  e  ,  Bethabara,  or  (according  to  the  correct  reading)  Bethany,  which  would 
seem  to  have  been  situated  not  very  far  from  the  ford  over  the  Jordan  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Jericho.  See  above,  Lect.  in.  p.  108,  note  2.  Here,  and  in  the 
adjoining  districts  of  Persea,  our  Lord  remained  till  the  second  journey  toward 
Jerusalem,  which  at  first  might  have  assumed  the  character  of  a  partial  mission- 
ary circuit;  with  the  Holy  City  as  its  ultimate  goal  (see  the  following  note),  and 
which  at  first  might  have  been  leisurely,  but  which  afterwards,  as  the  sequel 
shows,  was  speedy. 

2  It  would  seem,  as  has  been  suggested  in  the  preceding  note,  that  our  Lord's 
present  journey  was  not  at  first  direct.  St.  Luke's  very  words  SiSdaKwv  K<xl 
■nopi'iav  Troiovfj-evos  sis  'IepoiKraA^u  (ch.  xiii.  22)  appear  almost  studiously  both 
to  mark  a  more  deliberate  progress  and  to  point  to  Jerusalem,  not  as  the  imme- 
diate destination,  but  as  the  place  toward  which  the  journey  was  tending.  See 
Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  321. 


Lect.  VI.    THE  JOURXEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  241 

with  plausible  words  to  expedite  His  departure,  and  to 
rid  themselves  of  One  whose  successful  preaching  and 
teaching  they  had  probably  already  observed  with  anxiety 
and  hatred.  They  affect  to  give  Him  friendly  warning ; 
they  urge  Him  to  depart,  because  Herod  was  seeking  to 
kill  Him.  Because  Herod  was  seeking  to 
kill  Him  !  O  double-sided  stratagem  !  O 
cunning  cooperation  of  evil  men  !  'T  was  Herod  who  was 
wishing  Him  to  depart;  'twas  Pharisees  who  were  wishing 
to  kill  Him.  That  weak,  wicked,  and  selfish  Tetrarch1  was 
probably  anxious  to  get  out  of  his  territory  One  whose 
fame  was  daily  spreading,  and  whom  he  knew  not  whether 
to  honor  or  to  persecute.  He  was  embarrassed,  but  soon 
both  sought  and  found  useful  tools  in  the  Pharisees,2  who 
were  only  too  ready  to  urge  our  Lord  to  leave  a  land 
where  His  life  was  comparatively  safe,  for  one  where,  as 
they  well  knew,  it  was  now  in  extremest  jeopardy.  But 
the  divine  Reader  of  the  heart,  as  His  message  to  Herod 
seems  to  prove,  and  His  mournful  address  to  Jerusalem,3 


1  See  Lect.  v.  p.  210,  note  1. 

2  The  above  explanation  is  the  only  one  which  appears  to  satisfy  the  context 
and  the  plain  meaning  of  the  terms  used.  Our  Lord  sees  through  the  stratagem, 
and  Bends  a  message  to  Herod,  which,  in  the  peculiar  term  used  (ttj  aKwneKi 
Taurjj,  Luke  xiii.  32),  implies  that  the  Tetrarch's  craftiness  had  not  escaped 
notice;  and,  in  the  distinct  specifications  of  time  ((T-fififpov  Kal  alipioi>  Kal  rfj 
TP'TJ)I,  seems  to  imply  not  mere  general  and  undefined  periods,  but  literal  and 
actual  days  (see  Meyer  and  Alford,  inloc),  two  of  which  would  be  spent  in  the 
territory  of  the  evil  man  to  whom  the  message  was  sent,  and  devoted  to  miracu- 
lous works  of  mercy.  That  our  Lord  really  designed  the  message  not  for  Herod 
but  I. ir  tin'  Pharisees  (Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  iv.  p.  61,  Clark;  comp.  also 
Cyril  Alex,  in  loc.  and  the  Scholiast  in  Cramer,  Catcn.  Vol.  ii.  p.  110)  seems 
highly  Improbable,  aud  contrary  to  the  plain  tenor  of  very  simple  and  very 
explicit  words. 

3  The  portion  which  this  address  to  Jerusalem  occupies  in  St.  Luke's  Gospel 
(ch.  xiii.  34),  as  compared  with  that  in  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  (see  ch.  xxiii.  37 
Bq.),  and  the  interpretation  which  is  to  be  given  to  the  words,  arc  points  which 
have  been  much  discussed.  With  regard  to  the  Jirst,  the  natural  coherence  with 
what  precedes  wholly  precludes  our  believing  that  St.  Luke  has  misplaced  the 
words.  Nearly  as  much  may  be  urged  for  the  position  of  the  words  in  St.  Mat- 
tbew.  It  appears,  then,  not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the  words  were 
ottered  on  two  different  occasions,  a  supposition  further  supported  by  some 
slight  diversities  of  language  in  the  two  places.  See  Alford  on  Luke  xiii.  34. 
With  regard  to  tin   s<-:,>n(t  point,  while  it  seems  dillicult  to  believe  that  the  words 

21 


242  THE  JOURNEYLNGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM     Lect.  VI. 

which  immediately  follows,  serves  indirectly  to  confirm, 
saw  in  an  instant  through  that  combination  of  cunning 
and  malevolence.  Works  of  mercy  were  yet  to  be  done, 
miraculous  cures  were  to  be  vouchsafed  to-day  and  to-mor- 
row, even  in  the  borders  of  that  wily  ruler's  province  ;  on 
the  third  was  to  begin  the  journey  that,  though  recom- 
menced  from   Ephraim,  was  the  last  made 

Johnxi.  54.  . 

actually  to  Jerusalem,  —  that  journey  that 
closed  with  Golgotha  and  its  perfected  sacrifice.1 

Whether  the  difficult  words  which  have  just  been  para- 
phrased apply  definitely  to  the  period  of  the 

Probable     events       l  .  i  l    J  J  r 

(hiring  the  last  two     history   now   before    us,   whether  they   are 

(lays  in  Perma.  .  .  .    .  .         ,  ,  .  . 

merely  proverbial,  or  whether  they  involve 
a  special  note  of  time,  cannot  confidently  be  decided. 
The  latter,  as  we  have  already  implied,  seems  the  more 
natural  view,  and  is  most  in  accordance  with  the  precise 
nature  of  the  inspired  language;  but  more  than  this 
cannot  be  positively  asserted.  One  thing  seems  perfectly 
clear,  that  in  the  succeeding  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel 
there  is  nothing  which  is  opposed  to  such  a  view,  and  that 
in  St.  John's  Gospel,  as  we  shall  hereafter  see,2  there  is 
something  in  its  favor.  That  our  Lord  preached  and  per- 
formed miracles3  during  the  brief  remainder  of  His  stay  in 

have  no  reference  to  the  time  when  the  very  terms  here  specified  were  actually 
used  (see  Mark  xi.  9),  it  seems  equally  difficult  to  believe  that  their  meaning  was 
then  exhausted.  We  may  thus,  perhaps  with  some  reason,  believe,  with  modern 
chronologers  (comp.  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  322),  that  the  words  had  a  first 
and  perhaps  immediate  reference  to  the  triumphal  entry,  and,  with  the  ancient 
writers  (Theophylact,  al.),  that  they  had  a  further  reference  to  the  Lord's  second 
advent. 

1  The  meaning  and  reference  of  TeAeioD,u.ai  (Luke  xiii.  32)  is  perhaps  slightly 
doubtful.  That  it  is  a  present  passive  (Syr.,  Vulg.),  not  a  pres.  middle  (Meyer), 
and  that  the  meaning  is  "  consummor  "  (Syr.,  Vulg.),  seems  clearly  to  follow 
from  the  regular  usage  of  the  verb  in  the  N.  Test.  (comp.  esp.  Phil.  iii.  12);  and 
that  the  reference  is  to  an  action  soon  and  certainly  (Winer,  Or.  J  40.  2)  to  be 
commenced,  and  also  to  be  continued,  seems  a  just  inference  from  the  tense. 
Combining  these  observations,  we  may  perhaps  rightly  refer  it,  as  above,  to  our 
Lord's  perfected  sacrifice  ("the  passion  upon  the  cross  for  the  salvation  of  the 
world,"  Cyr.  Alex.),  winch  was  consummated  in  Golgotha,  but  the  onward 
course  to  which  was  commenced  when  our  Lord  left  the  borders  of  Pera;a. 

2  See  below,  pp.  267,  268. 

3  The  prominent  declaration  in  our  Lord's  message  to  Herod  is  that  there  will 


Lect.  VI.    THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  243 

Perrea  can  scarcely  be  doubted.     That  He  healed  a  man 

afflicted  with  dropsy1   at  the   house  of  a  leader  of  the 

Pharisees,  where  He  was  invited,  as  it  would         Lukcxiv.i. 

seem,  only  to  be  watched,  and  uttered  there  \''r-K- 

the  appropriate  parable  of  the  Great  Supper, 

—  that  publicans8  and  sinners  crowded  round  Him,  —  and 

that  when  scribes  and  Pharisees  murmured  thereat,  He 

uttered  the  parables  of  the  Lost  Sheep,  the 

Lost    Coin,   the    Prodigal    Son,   and    subse-         ra-.f' 

quently,  to  His  disciples,  though  in  the  hear-         lZ'"v.u. 

ing   of  the   Pharisees,  the   parables    of  the         j£/jy 

Unjust  Steward,  and    of  Lazarus3  and  the 

Rich  Man,  —  seems  almost  certain  from  the  place  which 

still  be  a  continuance  of  miraculous  works  of  mercy  "to-day  and  to-morrow." 
Of  these  St.  Luke  only  mentions  the  healing  of  a  man  afflicted  with  dropsy ;  but 
as  we  may  observe  that  in  this  portion  of  his  Gospel  he  was  clearly  moved  rather 
to  record  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  than  to  specify  His  mighty  works,  we  cannot 
fairly  press  the  omission  of  other  miracles  that  might  have  taken  place  on  these 
c iluding  days. 

1  On  this  miracle,  which  forms  one  of  the  seven  performed  on  the  Sabbath 
(see  above,  p.  168,  note  2),  compare  some  comments  by  Anselm.  Horn,  x.  p.  180 
(1  :iris,  1676),  a  few  remarks  by  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  iv.  p.  67  (Clark), 
and  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  329.  The  miracle  was  performed  at  the 
house  of  an  df>xu>v  T<*"/  &api<ra.i(iii/  (Luke  xiv.  1),  —  a  general  title,  as  it  would 
serin.  Implying  some  leadership  or  preeminence  in  the  sect.     See  Meyer  in  loc. 

2  The  peculiar  reference  which  St.  Luke  here  makes  to  "  all  the  publicans" 
[iravTes  oi  reXtouai,  Luke  xv.  1)  appears  to  deserve  attention  as  something 
more  than  a  merely  general  or  "popularly  hyperbolical "  (Meyer)  form  of  cx- 
p  « — ion .  If  our  Lord  was  now  near  one  of  the  fords  of  the  Jordan,  and  not 
far  from  Jericho,  he  would  be  on  the  borders  of  a  district  in  which,  owing  to  its 
great  productiveness  (Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  559),  these  tax  collectors 
would  probably  ha\  e  been  very  numerous.  Comp.  Luke  xix.  2,  and  see  Lange, 
/..  h,  ,i ./,  .in.  ii.  6. 1,  Part  ii.  p.  1159. 

1  mm  the  general  connection  of  Luke  xvi.  1  {t\eyzv  Se  Kal  irpbs  tovs  /xa^nj- 
Tas)  with  eh.  w.,  and  the  apparent  connection  of  subject  between  ch.  xvi.  19 — 
31  with  vcr.  9 — 13  (see  .Meyer  in  loc.  p.  421,  ed.  3),  we  may  perhaps  infer  that  this 
parable  was  uttered  on  the  same  day  that  so  many  of  the  publicans  came  to  bear 
our  Lord's  teaching  (eh.  xv.  1),  and  probably  at  the  close  of  the  last  day  in 
Perea,  or  at  the  beginning  of  the  next,  when  our  Lord  might  have  been  in  the 
district  Of  Jericho.  See  above,  p.  240,  note  1.  If  this  be  so,  and  we  agree  to 
Combine  with  tbia  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel  the  narrative  in  John  xi.  1  sq. 
(see  below),  this  parable  would  have  been  uttered  only  a  day  or  two  after  our 
Lord  had  received  the  message  about   Lazarus.     May  not.  then,  the  name  of  the 

sufferer  In  the  parable  have  l n  suggested  by  the  name  of  Lazarus  of  Bethany, 

on  whom  our  Lord's  thoughts  might  now  have  been  dwelling,  and  in  who 

tory  there  may  have  been  poBsibly  some  circumstances  of  resemblance  to  that  of 


244  THE   JOURNEYLNGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

these  discourses  occupy  in  the  present  portion  of  St.  Luke's 
narrative.  That  all  this  might  have  been  done  in  the  two 
days,  the  "  to-day  and  to-morrow  "  which  our  Lord  twice 
en.  xiti. s"  33.  so  distinctly  specifies,  and  that  on  the  third 
He  might  have  crossed  the  Jordan  and  com- 
menced a  journey,  which,  though,  as  we  have  already 
observed,  not  the  last  to  Judaea,1  was  notwithstanding  the 
last  estimated  with  reference  to  the  final  goal,  Jerusalem, 
—  is  a  supposition  which  seems  to  coincide  fully  with  the 
language  and  notices  of  St.  Luke.2 

And  with  this  too  the  narrative  of  St.  John  does  indeed 
appear  very  strikingly  to    harmonize.     The 
jASx*     next  event  recorded  by  that  Evangelist,  after 
St'ch''"'-&  tue  n°tice  of  the  withdrawal  to  and  preach- 

ing in  Peraea,  is  the  message  sent  by  the  af- 
flicted sisters  of  Lazarus,  accompanied  by  the  special 
note  of  time  that  the  Lord  abode  two  days  where  He  then 
was.  Now,  as  two  days  more  would  easily  bring  our  Lord 
from  Peraea  to  Bethany,3  and  as  we  also  know  that  Lazarus 

the  Lazarus  of  the  parable?  The  opinions  of  early  writers  were  divided  in 
reference  to  this  parable,  some  (Iremeus,  Tertullian,  Chrysostom,  al.)  conceiving 
it  to  be  an  actual  history,  some  of  equal  antiquity  (Clem.  Alex.,  Theophihis, 
Asterius,  al.)  more  plausibly  regarding  it  a  parable.  See  especially  the  citations 
in  Suicer,  Thesaur.  s.  v.  Adfapos,  Vol.  ii.  p.  206  sq. 

1  The  journey  from  Ephraim,  which  apparently  lay  through  Samaria,  Galilee, 
and  Perrca,  was  the  last  to  Juclcea,  but,  in  reference  to  Jerusalem,  may  be  con- 
sidered a  part  of  the  second.  On  these  journeys  see  above,  p.  223  sq.,  and  comp. 
p.  225,  note  3. 

2  Compare  the  notice  of  this  second  journey,  iroptiav  Troiovfj,evos  (h  '\epovaa 
hriH  (Luke  xiii.  22),  with  the  notice  of  what  seems  the  third  journey,  eV  ra>  iropw- 
ecrdat  avrov  tis  'lepovaaKiifi,  koX  avrhs  8ir]pxeT0  5ia  jj.ecrov  Sauapei'as  kcu  TaAi- 
Aaias  (Luke  xvii.  11),  — between  which  passages  there  is  just  the  connection  we 
might  expect,  on  the  hypothesis  that  the  first  refers  to  a  journey  which  did  not 
reach  Jerusalem,  and  that  the  second  refers  to  its  continuation  or  recommence- 
ment. 

3  According  to  the  Jerusalem  Itinerary,  the  distance  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho 
was  eighteen  miles,  and  from  Jericho  to  the  Jordan  five  more,  in  all  twenty- 
three  miles.  The  same  distances  are  specified  by  Josephus  (Bell.  Jiul.  IV.  8.  3)  as 
one  hundred  and  fifty  and  sixty  stades  respectively,  or  in  all  two  hundred  and 
ten  stades.  See  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxvm.  Vol.  hi.  p.  GO.  Whichever  calcu- 
lation be  adopted,  our  Lord  clearly  could  have  reached  Bethany  from  the 
Jordan  in  as  little  as  one  day,  and  with  ease  in  two,  even  if  he  had  been  some 
little  distance  on  the  other  side  of  the  river.  On  the  rate  of  a  day's  journey,  see 
Greswell,  Dissert.  XXVI.  (Append.)  Vol.  iv.  p.  525  sq. 


LBCT.  VI.    TBE   J0URNT3YINGS    TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  245 

was  summoned  from  the  tomb  after  he  had  lain  there  four 
days,  how  very  plausible   is  the   supposition 
that   the    Lord  Avas  in  Peroea  when    lie   re- 
ceived the  message  from  the  sisters  of  Lazarus,1  and  that 
the  two  days  during  which  "He  abode  in  the  place  where 
He  was"  were  the  two  last  days  in  Perrca, 
the  "to-day  and   to-morrow"  of  which  He 
spake  when  the  Pharisees  came  with  the  hypocritical  warn- 
intr  about  the  designs  of  Herod.     This  seem- 

.  „     ,  .  ,.  Lukexiii.il. 

ing  coincidence  of  the  notes  of  time  supplied 
by  the  fourth  Evangelist  with  those  hinted  at  by  St.  Luke, 
combined  with  the  further  very  curious  fact,  already  alluded 
to,  that  the  not  very  common  name  of  Laza- 

.  i  i         i    t  t     u  See  p.  24S,  note  3. 

rus  -  appears  in  a  parable  delivered  by  our 
Lord  just  at  a  time  when  it  may  be  thought  to  have  been 
suggested  by  the  message  which  St.  John  tells  us  was 
sent  to  our  Lord  about  the  actual  Lazarus  of  Bethany,  — 
all  this  does  indeed  seem  to  support  our  view  of  the 
chronology  of  the  present  period,  and  to  reflect  some  prob- 
ability on  our  explanation  of  the  ambiguous  "to-day  and 
to-morrow"  of  the  third  Evangelist.3 

But  let  us  pass  onward. 

On  the  mighty  but  familiar  miracle  of  the     bv  the  roMn^o/ 
raising  of  Lazarus  I  will  not  pause,  save  to     Lazarws- 
remark  that  the  effect  it  produced  was  immense.     It  gath- 


1  The  message  only  announced  that  Lazarus  was  sick,  but  the  supposition  is 
not  Improbable  that  by  the  time  the  messenger  readied  our  Lord  Lazarus  had 
died.  It  may  be  observed  that  two  days  afterwards,  when  our  Lord  speaks  of 
tbe  death  of  Lazarus,  be  uses  the  aorist  airibavtv  (John  xi.  14),  which  seems  to 
refer  the  deatb  to  some  period,  undefined  indeed,  but  now  past.  See  Fritz,  de 
Aoristi  Ft,  p.  17,  and  compare  notes  on  1  Thess.  ii.  16.  On  the  adjustments  of 
time  mentioned  in  the  narrative  of  St.  John,  see  Meyer  on  John  xi.  17,  p.  331 

(Ml.  8). 

-  Lazarus  appears  to  be  a  shortened  form  of  the  more  familiar  Eleazar.  See 
ally  the  learned  Investigation  of  Bynseus,  de Morte  Christ i,  m.  8,  Vol.  i. 
p   180  <|..  and  compare  Lightfbot,  Hot.  Hebr.  in  Joann.  xi.  1. 

8  We  may  perhaps  recognize  a  further  point  of  contact  between  the  rfj  rplrri 
Tt\(ivv/j.ai  of  St.  Luke  (eh.  xiii.  32)  and  the  remarks  of  the  Apostles  (JohnxL 
■-.  16)  on  our  Lord's  proposal  to  go  into  Judsea:  they  regard  that  Journey,  as  it 
truly  proved  to  he,  a  journey  of  which  rb  TtTeKeiuxrdai  was  the  issue. 

21* 


24u  THE  JOUBNEYINGS    TOWARD   JERUSALEM.     Lect.  VI. 

ered  in  believers  even  from  the  ranks  of  opponents ;    it 

afterwards  brought  multitudes  from  Jerusa- 

johnxi.45.         iem  t0     ee  ^     Hsen  man,  and  swelled  the 

Ch.  xti.  9.  ' 

triumph  of  the  Lord's  entry;1  and,  alas!   it 
also  now  stirred  up  enemies  to  delay  no  longer,  and  made 
a  high-priest  pervert  the  mysterious  gift  of 
°  prophecy2  by  using  it  to  hurry  on  the  mem- 

bers of  his  council   to  plot  against  innocent 
blood.     So  avowed  were  now  the   savage   counsels,  that 
our  Lord  at  once  withdrew  to  the  town  of 
Ephraim,  on   the   borders   of  Samaria,3  and 
there,  after  an  abode  of  perhaps  a  very  few  weeks,4  com- 
menced the  last,  and,  as  we  may  perhaps  venture  to  term 
it,  the  farewell  iourney  described  by  all  the 

Matt.xix.l.  '  ■       ■•    -n    ■  i-  ■ 

ikukx.i.  three   Synoptical  Evangelists,  and  specially 

noticed    by    St.    Luke    as    being    directed 

"  through  the  midst  of  Samaria  and  Galilee."  5   The  strik- 


1  See  John  xii.  17, 18.  On  this  mighty  miracle,  in  which  our  Lord  not  only 
appears,  as  previously,  the  conqueror  of  death,  hut  even  of  corruption  (John 
xi.  39),  see  the  commentaries  of  Origen  [the  part  preceding  ver.  39  is  lost],  Chrys- 
ostom,  Cyril  Alex.,  and  Augustine  (in  Joann.  Tractat.  xlix.),  Bp.  Hall,  Con- 
tempi,  iv.  23,  24,  the  very  good  comments  in  Stier,  Disc,  of  Our  Lord,  Vol.  vi. 
p.  1  sq.  (Clark),  the  vindication  of  Lardner,  Works,  Vol.  xi.  p.  1,  and  Trench, 
Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  389. 

2  It  has  often  heen  discussed  whether  this  was  conscious  or  unconscious 
prophecy.  The  tenor  of  the  context  seems  clearly  to  show  that  it  can  only  be 
regarded  in  the  latter  view.  Caiaphas  was  only  consciously  stating  what  he 
deemed  politically  advisable,  but  he  was  nevertheless,  as  the  inspired  Evangelist 
distinctly  tells  us,  at  the  time  actually  prophesying:  Kara  rov  '\-naov  ay<wi£6- 
fxfvos  ovdeu  t\ttov  7rpoe<J>7jTeucrer.  Origen,  in  Joann.  Tom.  xi.  12,  where  the 
nature  of  this  prophecy  is  considered  at  great  length.  Compare  Thesaur.  Nov. 
(Crit.  Sacr.)  Vol.  ii.  p.  525. 

3  There  seems  reason  for  believing  that  this  place  was  identical  with  Ophrah, 
and  corresponds  with  the  modern  village  of  Taiyibeh,  which,  according  to  Rob- 
inson, occupies  a  commanding  site  on  the  top  of  a  conical  hill,  whence  a  fine 
view  is  to  be  obtained  of  the  eastern  mountains,  the  valley  of  the  Jordan,  and 
the  Dead  Sea.  —  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  pp.  444,  447.  It  is  about  6h.  20m.  (1  hour  = 
three  Roman  miles)  distant  from  Jerusalem  (see  ib.,  Vol.  ii.  p.  508),  a  distance 
very  closely  agreeing  with  that  specified  by  Jerome  (Onomast.  s.  v.),  who  makes 
it  twenty  miles. 

4  See  above,  p.  225,  note  3. 

s  The  interpretation  of  Meyer  (comp.  Alford  in  loc,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Tart 
II.  p.  1065),  according  to  which  Sio  ixiaov  ^afiapelas  xai  TaAiXaias  (Luke  xvii. 
11)  is  to  be  understood  as  implying  the  frontier  district  lying  between  these  two 


LEOT.  VI.    THE   JOUUXEYIXGS    TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  247 

ing  harmony  between  this  notice  of  direction  and  the 
abode  in  the  frontier  town  of  Ephraim  specified  by  St. 
John,  may  well  give  us  confidence  in  our  foregoing  ar- 
rangement, and  add  strength  to  our  belief  in  the  general 
chronological  accuracy  of  the  latter  as  well  as  of  the 
former  portions  of  the  narrative  of  the  third  Evangelist. 

The  incidents  in  this  last  journey  are  not  many.     Possi- 
bly on   the  frontiers  of  Samaria  we  may  fix 
the  scene  of  the  healing  of  the  ten  lepers,1     um  journey  to  Ju- 
and  of  the  gratitude  of  the   single  sufferer     d TiLte  xr«.  i«. 
that  belonged  to  the  despised  land.     To  the 
period   of  the   transit  through    Galilee  we   may  perhaps 
assign  the  notice  of  the    solemn    answer  to  the  probably 
treacherous  inquiry  of  the  Pharisees   when 
the  kingdom  of  God  should  come,  and  to        *'  .„, 

°  '  CA.2Ylll.l8tf. 

the  same  period2  the  parable  of  the  Unjust 
Judge,  —  a  parable  that  gains  much  of  its  force  and  solem- 
nity from  the  previous  mention  of  a  time  of  terrible  trial 
and  perplexity.8     From  Galilee  we  seem  fully  justified,  by 


provinces  along  which  our  Lord  journeyed  from  west  to  east,  is  apparently 
grammatical]]'  defensible  (see  Xen.  Anab.  i.  4.4),  but  certainly  not  very  natural 
or  probable.  The  plain  and  obvious  meaning  surely  is  that  our  Lord  went,  not 
merely  "  per  Samaritanos  in  Galilasam,"  Syr.-1'esh.,  but  through  the  middle  of 
both  countries.  See  Lightfoot,  Chron.  Temp.  §  G2,  and  comp.  Wieseler,  Citron. 
Synops.  p.  322. 

1  On  this  miracle,  the  characteristic  of  which  is  its  deferred  working  till  the 
faith  of  the  Bufferers  was  shown  by  their  obedience  to  the  Lord's  command,  see 
Bp.  Hall,  Contempt,  rv.  10,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  332,  —  who,  how- 
ever, has  adopted  the  not  very  probable  interpretation  referred  to  in  the  pre- 
ceding mile;  and  compare  Hook,  Strut,  mi  tin  Miracles,  Vol.  ii.  p.  140,  and  a 
good  practical  sermon  by  Hare  (A.  W.),  Sermons,  Vol.  ii.  p.  457. 

-'  It  is  very  doubtful  whether  these  incidents  are  to  be  assigned  to  the  portion 
of  the-  journey  through  Galilee,  or  to  that  through  Ferssa.  The  latter  view  ia 
ado], led  bj  Greawell,  Dissert,  xxxi.  Vol.  ii.  p.  642;  the  former,  however,  seems 
Slightly  the  most  probable.  See  Lightfoot,  Citron.  Temp.  §  C2,  CO,  Vol.  ii.  p.  40 
(Boterod.  b;8(3). 

8  There  seems  no  reason  for  supposing,  with  Olahansen  and  others,  that  some 
Intermediate  remarks  connecting  this  parable  more  closely  with  what  precedes 
are  here  omitted,  (in  the  contrary,  as  ver.  7  seems  t<>  prove,  the  connection  is 
close  and  immediate.  When  the  Lord  comes,  He  comes  to  avenge  Bis  own  and 
free  them  from  their  foes,  and  that  full  surely.  If  an  unjust  earthly  jndge 
avenged  her  v  ho  called  upon  him,  Bhall  not  a  righteous  beavenly  Judge  avenge 
-  •  t  of  God?    See  .Meyer  {«  toe.  p.  Ill  (ed.  8),  and  on  the  parable  generally, 


248  TEE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

the  distinct  notices  both  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  in 
tracing  our  Lord's  steps  to  the  lands  across 
the  Jordan.     Whether  this  journey  extended 
to  the  more  northern  parts  of  Peraea,  where 
it  will  be  remembered  a  few  months  before  the  four  thou- 
sand were  fed,  and  where  the  name  of  the  God  of  Israel 
was  so  magnified,  we  cannot  determine.   The 
a    xv.   .        expressions  of  St.  Matthew  would  rather  lead 

Ch.  xix.  1.  l 

us  to  the  contrary  opinion,  and  to  the  suppo- 
sition that  our  Lord  passed  directly  onward  to  the  portions 
nearer  Judrea1  in  which  He  had  preached  a  few  weeks 
before,  and  to  which  we  shall  apparently  be  right  in  confin- 
ing the  few  remaining  incidents  which  we  meet  with  in 
this  part  of  the  inspired  narrative.2  We  observe  there 
just  what  we  should  have  expected  from  our  remembrance 
of  our  Lord's  former  sojourn  in  that  country.  We  trace 
the  same  characteristics  displayed  by  the  two  classes  of 
our  Lord's  hearers  with  which  we  are  so  familiar  in  earlier 

parts  of  the  Gospel  history,  —  thankful  and 

Matt.xix.2.  ...  i 

even  enthusiastic  reception  on  the  part  of  the 
multitude,  craft  and  malignity  on  the  part  of  the  Pharisees 


compare  Greswell,  Exposition  of  the  Parables,  Vol.  iv.  p.  213  sq.,  Trench,  Xotes 
on  the  Parables,  p.  439. 

1  There  is  some  little  difficulty  in  the  words  -fiX&ev  els  ra  opta  Trjs  'lovSaias 
wepav  tov  'lopfidvov  (Matt.  xix.  1).  Viewed  simply,  and  with  the  remembrance 
that  an  insertion  of  the  article  before  irtpav  is  not  positively  necessary  (see 
Winer,  Gr.  §  20.  2),  they  would  seem  in  accordance  with  the  statement  of 
rtolemy  (Geogr.  v.  16.  9)  that  a  certain  portion  of  the  province  of  Juda?a 
actually  lay  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Jordan;  viewed,  however,  in  connection 
with  Mark  x.  1,  they  seem  rather  to  mark  the  general  direction  of  our  Lord's 
journey,  and  might  be  paraphrased,  —  "He  came  to  the  frontiers  of  Judasa 
(ovk  tir\  to  fxeaa,  a\\'  oiovel  rd  &Kpa,  Origen),  His  route  lying  on  the  other 
side  of  the  Jordan."    Comp.  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxi.  Vol.  ii.  p.  542. 

2  In  this  arrangement  nearly  all  harmonists  are  agreed;  the  only  doubt,  as  has 
been  before  observed  (p.  247,  note  2),  is  whether  these  are  the  only  incidents 
which  belong  to  the  journey  through  Perwa.  Greswell  urges  the  apparent  con- 
secutive character  of  the  discourses,  Luke  xvii.  20 — xviii.  14,  but  it  may  be  said 
that  there  is  really  no  greater  break  between  Luke  xvii.  19  and  Luke  xvii.  20, 
which  Greswell  disconnects,  than  between  Luke  xviii.  14  and  Luke  xviii.  15, 
which  he  unites.  It  must  remain,  then,  a  matter  of  opinion,  the  few  arguments 
in  favor  of  one  arrangement  being  nearly  of  equal  weight  with  those  in  favor  of 
the  other. 


Lkct.  VI.     THE   JOUltXEYIXGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  249 


and   their  various  adherents.     The  latter  feelings  are  soon 
displayed  in  the  insidious  inquiry  about  the 

Hark  x.  3 .«'/. 


lawfulness  of  divorce,  a  question  studiously 


Mark  x.  21. 


chosen  to  place  our  Lord  in  antagonism 
either  with  the  school  of  Ilillel  or  with  the  school  of 
Shammai,  and  thus  to  bring  upon  Him  the  hostility  of 
one  or  other  of  two  influential  parties,  if  not  also  in  some 
degree  to  involve  Him  with  the  adulterous  Tetrarch  in 
whose  territory  He  then  was.1  In  these  same  districts, 
and   in    touching    contrast   to   all    this   craft, 

°  .  Matt.  xix.  13. 

"were    the    young    children    brought    to    our 

Lord,  and  blessed  with   the  outward  signs  and  tokens  of 

His   divine  love.2     Here,  too,  was   the   home   of  that  rich 

young  man  whom  Jesus  looked  on  and  loved, 

and  of  whom   the   melancholy  notice  is  left,       "' 

that  worldly  possessions  kept  him  back  from 

the  kingdom  of  God.3 

And   now  every  step  was   leading   our  Lord   and   His 
Apostles  nearer  to  Jerusalem,  and  every  step  calls  forth  in 


1  Compare  Do  Wettc  on  Matt.  xix.  3,  to  whom  the  hint  is  due.  The  main 
design,  however,  as  St.  .Matthew's  addition  Kara.  Trciirav  alriai'  (practically  the 
language  of  the  school  of  Ilillel)  seems  clearly  to  show,  was  to  induce  our  Lord 
to  decide  upon  a  question  that  was  much  in  debate  between  two  large  parties, 
the  school  of  ilillel  adopting  the  lax  view,  the  school  of  Shammai  the  more 
shirt :  "  Schola  Shammaana,  non  permisit  repudia  nisi  in  causi  adulterii,  Hille- 
liana  alitor."  —  Lightfoot  in  loo.  Vol.  ii.  p.  315.  Comp.  Jost,  Gesch.  di  t  Jud<  nth. 
ii  :;.  18,  Vol.  i.  p.  2.-,:. 

•-  Ui  are  distinctly  told  by  St.  .Matthew  the  two  blessings  which  the  bringers  of 
the  children  hope  to  receive  for  them  at  the  hands  of  our  Lord,  —  iVa  tcls  xe'Pas 
iir&ij  a-JTo?s  Ka\  Trpncnv^-qrai  (ch.  xix.  13).  The  former  act,  the  imposition  of 
hands,  was  probably  regarded  to  some  extent  what  it  truly  was,  the  outward 
sign  of  the  conveyance  of  inward  gifts  and  blessings  (ttji*  <ppuvpriTiKr,v  eaurov 
hvuaixiy,  Euthyin.  Comp.  Origen  in  Matt.  Tom.  XV.  6);  the  latter  was  regarded, 
and  apparently  not  uncommonly  sought  for  (see  I'.uxtorf,  Synag.  cap.  VII.  p.  188, 
Baal],  1661),  as  adding  to  the  former  the  efficacies  Of  holy  and  prevailing  prayer. 
Rightly  did  the  early  Church  see  in  this  an  argument  for  infant  baptism.  ( !om- 
pare  Augustine.  Serm.  cxv.  4,  Vol.  v.  p.  657 (ed.  ftfigne). 

;!  fliat  this  yonng  man  was  not  a  hypocrite,  but  one  whom  wealth  and  world- 
line--!  held  in  a  thraldom  that  kept  him  from  Christ,  is  justly  maintained  by 
Chrysostom  {in  Matt.  Som.  lxiii.),  who  bases  his  opinion  on  Mark  x.  21.  The 
apocryphal  version  of  the  incident,  said  to  come  from  the  Evang.  secundum 
ii  brceos,  la  given  by  <  >rlgen  in  Matt.  (  Per.  Interpr.)  Tom.  xv.  14.  See  Hofmann, 
/       i  Jem,  $  71,  p.  30G. 


250  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

the  very  outward  demeanor  of  the  Lord  a  manifestation 
of  a  dauntless    resolution    which    awes    and 

to?,Z!i'trl°aiem"  amazes  *  that  shrinking  and  now  foreboding 
company.     The  Lord   now   heads  His  band 

Ch.  x.  33.  r        J 

of  followers,  as  St.  Mark  graphically  men- 
tions, and  leads  the  onward  way.  To  the  general  com- 
pany of  disciples,  augmented  as  it  now  well  might  have 
been  by  many  a  worshipper  that  the  festival  was  bringing 
up  to  Jerusalem,  the  Lord  is  silent;  but  to  the  chosen 
Twelve2  He  now  again  for  the  third  time  speaks  of  the 

future  that  awaited  Him.  Yet  they  could  not 
"  'xx'  or  they  would  not  understand.     Nay,  they 

Luke  ix.  46.  •>  '  '  J 

seem,  as  on  a  former  occasion,  almost  to  have 

put  a  counter-interpretation  on  the  words;  for,  strange  as 

indeed  it  appears,  this  we  learn  was  the  hour 

„   ,"''"     "       that  the  sons  of  Zebedee  and  their  mother 

Mark  x.  Jo  sq. 

preferred  their  ambitious  request, and  in  fancy 
were  enthroning  themselves  on  the  right  hand  and  the  left 
hand  of  their  triumphant  Master.3 

1  The  second  reason  assigned  by  Euthymius  {on  Mark  x.  32)  seems  certainly 
tbe  true  one:  "  They  were  amazed,  either  at  what  He  was  saying,  or  because  of 
His  own  accord  He  was  going  onward  to  His  passion"  (Sioti  7]vTOfj.6\ei  nphs  rb 
irados ) . 

2  It  is  distinctly  told  us  by  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xx.  17)  that  this  mournful  com- 
munication was  made  privately  (/tar'  iSlav)  to  the  Apostles.  Comp.  Mark  x. 
32,  Luke  xviii.  31.  The  two  other  occasions  on  which  the  same  sad  future  had 
been  announced  to  them  was  in  the  neighborhood  of  Ca;sarea  Philippi.  imme- 
diately after  St.  Peter's  confession  (Matt.  xvi.  21  sq.,  Mark  viii.  30  sq.,  Luke  ix. 
21  sq.),  and  not  very  long  afterwards  during  the  subsequent  return  to  Caper- 
naum (Matt.  xvii.  22  sq.,  Mark  ix.  30  sq.,  Luke  ix.  43  sq.).  The  reason  for  the 
private  manner  in  which  the  communication  was  made  is  perhaps  rightly  given 
by  Euthymius,  —  to  avoid  giving  grounds  of  offence  to  the  attendant  multitudes. 

•n>  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  request  is  made  by  one  from  whom,  according 
to  our  common  estimate  of  his  character,  we  should  not  have  expected  it,  —  St. 
John,  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.  The  attempt  of  Olshausen  to  explain 
away  the  request  as  a  petition  hereafter  to  enjoy  the  same  privilege  of  nearness 
to  our  Lord  (Comment,  on  Gospels,  Vol.  iii.  p.  121,  Clark)  must  certainly  be 
rejected;  such  a  desire  was  doubtless  present,  but  the  request  itself  was  plainly 
one  for  irpoeSpta  (Chrys.),  a  genuine  characteristic  of  the  glowing  hearts  of  the 
Sons  of  Thunder.  See  above,  p.  229,  note  1.  According  to  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xx. 
20),  the  request  was  preferred  by  their  mother,  Salome.  The  explanation  is 
obvious:  the  mother  was  the  actual  speaker,  the  two  apostles  were  the  instiga- 
tors; alffx.'"'oiJ.ivoi  TpoPdWovrat  t/;j>  reKodaav,  Chrysost.  in  Matt.  Horn.  lxv. 
Vol.  vii.  p.  04i  (ed.  Bencd.  2). 


Lect.  VI.     THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  251 

Jericho  is  soon  reached ;  and  there,  as  it  would  seem,  at 
the  entrance  into  the  city,  one,  or,  as  St.  Mat- 

Arrival  at  Jericho. 

thew  specifies,  tico  blind  men  l  hail  the  Lord 
with  the  same  title  that  a  few  days  afterwards  was  heard 
from  a  thousand  voices  on  the  slopes  of  Oli- 
vet.   They  call  unto  the  Son  of  David,  whom        „  .    „ 
as  yet  they  saw  not;  they  call,  and  they  are 
healed.     Begirt  l»y  the  now  increasing  and  glorifying  mul- 
titude, the  Lord  enters  the  city.     But  praises  soon  change 
to  general  murmurings   when   the  just   and 
faithful  ZacohsBUS  is  called  down  from  the 
sycamore-tree  to  entertain   Him  on  whose  divine  form  he 
would  have  rejoiced  only  to  have  gazed  afar  off,-  but  whom 
now  he  was  to  be  so  blest  as  to  welcome  under  the  shadow 
of  his  roof.     Still  the  heart  of  the  people  was 
moved.     Wild  hopes  and  expectations  still 
pervade  all  hearts;  and  it  is  to  allay  them  that  the  Lord 
now   utters,  both    to  the    disciples   and   the 

Ch.  Tic.  11. 

multitude,  the  solemn  parable  of  the  Pounds, 

—  that  parable  which,  as  St.  Luke  tells  us,  was  specially 


1  It  is  difficult  to  account  for  this  seeming  discrepancy,  as  there  is  not  only  a 
difference  between  St  Matthew  and  the  second  and  third  Evangelists  as  to  num- 
ber, but  between  St.  Luke  and  the  tirst  and  second  as  to  time.  Perhaps,  as 
seemed  likely  in  the  similar  case  of  the  Gad&rene  demoniacs  (see  above,  p.  178, 
note  -),  one  of  the  blind  men,  Bartiniaus,  was  bitter  known  (Augustine),  and 
thus  his  cure  more  particularly  specified.  Sec  Mark  x.  44  sq.  If  we  add  to  this 
the  further  supposition  that  the  one  who  is  mentioned  at  our  Lord's  entry  into 
Jericho  as  having  learnt  from  the  crowd  who  it  was  that  was  coming  into  the 
city  (Luke  xviii.  37),  was  not  healed  then,  but  in  company  with  another  sufferer, 
when  our  Lord  was  leaving  the  city  (MaldonatUS,  Ben  gel),  we  have  perhaps 
the  mo  t  probable  solution  of  the  difficulty  that  has  yet  been  proposed.  Ou  this 
point  and  the  mir&Cle  generally  sec  Trench,  Xnh '.8  on  the  Miracles,  p.  428  S(j.,  and 
compare  Origen,  in  Matt.  Tom.  xvi.  !t,  who  adopts  an  allegorical  mode  of  recon- 
ciliation, Augustine,  de  Consent.  Evang.  u.  66,  Vol.  Hi.  p.  lb;7,  Serm.  i.xxxvm. 
Vol.  v.  ]p.  589  (ed.  Uignl),  and  Lange,  Lebt  n  Jem,  ii.  C.  1,  Part  n.  p.  1158. 

i  The  language  of  St.  Luke  (££qrei  i5e?f  t^'I^cow'  ris  icmv,  ch.  xix.  3) 
would  seem  to  imply  that  Zacchcus  was  anxious  to  behold  the  person  and  out- 
ward form  of  our  Lord,  and  distinguish  it  from  that  of  the  bystanders.  That 
this  was  not  from  curiosity,  but  from  a  far  deeper  feeling,  —  perhaps  presenti- 
ment,—seems  clear  from  what  followed:  ci5«|/  ainhv  roii  bfpb6.KfJi.ois  T7JS  b.v- 
bpunr6ri)Tos,  trpotio'e  yap  ainbf  rols  ocpddKtxois  rTyr  *>«ot7jtos,  liuthymius,  in 
lOC.     <  In  t  be  title  a/'X<TeAan'?js,  compare  p.  35,  ncHe  1. 


252  THE  JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD  JERUSALEM.    Lect.  VI. 

designed   to    check   the   hope   that   God's   kingdom   was 
speedily  to  be  revealed.1 

In  the   same  noticeable  attitude,   as  is   again  specially 
mentioned,  at  the  head  of  His  followers,  the 

Luke  j-ior.  11.  x  ,  .  ,  ,         _ 

r.     .. ,  Lord    soon  lourneys  onward  towards   Jeru- 

Jonn  in.  1.  *>  * 

salem,  and  reaches  Bethany  six  days2  before 
his  last  Passover. 

And  here  our  present  section,  and  our  extended  though, 
alas,  hasty  survey  of  the  concluding  year  of  our  Lord's 
ministry,  comes  to  its  close. 

I  will  delay  you  with  no  practical  comments,  —  for  the 
time  is  far  spent, — but  I  will  conclude  with  the  deep  and 


1  Apparently  two  reasons  are  given  by  St.  Luke  why  our  Lord  uttered  this 
parable,  —  "  because  He  was  nigh  to  Jerusalem,"  and  "  because  the  kingdom  of 
God  should  immediately  appear"  (ch.  xix.  11).  The  two  reasons,  however, 
really  only  amount  to  one,  our  Lord's  journey  to  Jerusalem  being  connected  in 
the  mind  of  the  populace  (as  was  fully  shown  two  or  three  days  later)  with  the 
establishment  there  of  His  future  kingdom:  "They  deemed,"  says  Euthymius, 
"  that  for  this  cause  He  was  now  going  up  that  He  might  reign  therein."  On 
the  parable  itself,  which  is  obviously  very  similar  to,  but  not  on  that  account  to 
be  regarded  as  identical  with,  the  parable  of  the  talents  (Matt.  xxv.  14),  see 
Greswell,  Exposition  of  the  Parables,  Vol.  iv.  p.  418  sq.,  Trench,  Notes  on  the 
Parables,  p.  234  sq. 

2  There  is  some  little  difficulty  as  to  the  date  of  our  Lord's  arrival  at  Bethany. 
It  is  definitely  fixed  by  St.  John  as  irpb  e£  i)ixtpwv  tov  irdaxa  (ch.  xii.  1),  and 
thus,  according  to  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the  words  and  the  usual  mode  of 
reckoning,  would  seem  to  be  Nisan  8,  the  Passover  being  Nisan  14.  Now,  as  it 
seems  certain  that  our  Lord  suffered  on  a  Friday,  and  as  it  is  scarcely  less  cer- 
tain that,  according  to  St.  John  (ch.  xiii.  1,  xviii.  28,  xix.  4),  the  Passover  was 
eaten  on  that  same  day,  it  will  follow  that  Nisan  8,  or  the  day  of  our  Lord's 
arrival  at  Bethany,  will  coincide  with  the  preceding  Saturday,  or  with  the  Jew- 
ish Sabbath.  Of  this  difficulty  various  solutions  have  been  proposed,  the  most 
elaborate  of  which  is  that  of  Greswell  (Dissert,  xxxviii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  51  sq.), 
according  to  which  our  Lord  came  from  Jericho  to  a  place  a  few  miles  from 
Bethany,  assumed  to  be  the  house  of  Zacchaeus,  on  Friday  eve,  and  on  Saturday 
eve,  after  sunset,  went  onward  to  Bethany.  This  appears  so  complicated,  that  it 
is  better  either  (a)  to  admit  that  our  Lord  arrived  on  Nisan  8,  but  to  leave  the 
circumstances  and  time  of  the  arrival  unexplained  (Liicke,  Meyer,  Alford),  or 
(6)  to  conceive  that  St.  John,  writing  generally,  does  not  here  include  the  days 
from  which  and  to  which  the  six  days  are  reckoned,  and  that  thus  our  Lord 
arrived  at  Bethany  on  Friday,  Nisan  7.  Comp.  Tischendorf,  Syn.  Eo.  p.  xliii. 
It  is  worthy  of  consideration,  however,  whether  (c)  our  Lord  might  not  have' 
arrived  on  Friday  eve  just  after  the  Sabbath  commenced,  so  that  the  day  of  His 
arrival  was  really,  according  to  Jewish  reckoning,  Nisan  8.  Discussions  of  this 
question  will  be  found  in  the  various  commentaries.  Compare  also  Bynreus,  de 
Morte  Christi,  1.  3.  12,  Vol.  i.  p".  188  sq.,  Schncckeuburger,  Btitrage,  p.  14. 


Lect.  VI.     THE   JOURNEYINGS   TOWARD   JERUSALEM.  253 

earnest  prayer  that  I  may  have  awakened  in  some  hearts 
a  fresh  desire  to  ponder  over  for  themselves 

/>  t_  ■  *»    t      •  Conclusion. 

the  connections  of  the  blessed  history  of  their 
own  and  the  world's  redemption.  The  close  study  of  it 
may  require  all  our  highest  powers,  and  tax  all  our  freshest 
energies;  but  believe  me,  brethren,  the  consolationsof  that 
study  no  tongue  of  men  or  angels  can  fully  tell.  While 
we  are  so  engaged  we  do  indeed  feel  the  deep  meaning 
of  what  an  apostle  has  called  the  "comfort"  of  the  word 

of  God.     Though   at  times  we  may  seem  as 

i  i     •  Rom- xv'  *• 

yet  in  doubtfulness  or  perplexity,  yet  soon, 

very  soon,  all  becomes  clear  and  comforting.     Lights  break 

around  our  path;    assurance  becomes  more  sure;    hopes 

burn   brighter;  love  waxes  warmer ;  sorrows  become  joys, 

and  joys  the  reflections  of  the  unending  felicities  of  the 

kingdom  of  Christ.     Around  us  and  about  us  we  feel  the 

deepening   influence   of    the   Eternal   Son.      All   inward 

things,  yea,  too,  all  outward  things,  appear  to  us  verily 

transfigured  and  changed.     We  cast  our  eyes  abroad  on 

earth ;  't  is  the  earth  that  lie  trod,  and  earth  seems  bright 

and  blessed.     We  raise  our  eyes  to  the  heavens,  and  we 

know  that  He  is  there ;  we  gaze,  and  faith 

,  .  Isa.  xxxiii.  17. 

rolls  back  those  everlasting  doors ;  yea,  we 

seem  to  see  the  vision  of  beauty,  and   in  our  spirit  we 

behold  our  God. 

22 


LECTURE   VII. 

THE    LAST    PASSOVER. 

BEHOLD,  WE  GO  UP  TO  JERUSALEM,  AND  ALL  THINGS  THAT  ARE  WRITTEN 
BY  THE  PROPHETS  CONCERNING  THE  SON  OP  MAN  SHALL  BE  ACCOM- 
PLISHED. —  St.  Luke  xviii.  31. 

We  have  now  entered  upon  a  portion  of  the  inspired 
narrative  which,    no  less  in  its  general  and 
M°„™"c  outward   features   than   in  the    subjects    on 

which  it  treats,  is  strikingly  different  from 
any  other  portion  that  we  have  yet  attempted  to  consider. 
Hitherto  in  only  a  very  few,  and  those  scattered  parts  of 
the  sacred  history,  has  the  united  testimony  of  the  four 
Evangelists  been  vouchsafed  to  us  in  reference  to  the  same 
facts.1  Sometimes  one  of  the  inspired  writers  has  been 
our  principal  guide,  sometimes  another.  What  one  has  left 
unnoticed  another  has  often  been  moved  to  record ;  but 
seldom  have  all  related  to  us  the  same  events,  or  even 
dwelt  in  equal  proportions  upon  the  same  general  divisions 


1  In  the  large  portion  of  the  Gospel  history  which  we  have  now  considered, 
apparently  not  more  than  three  or  four  cases  can  be  found  in  which  the  same 
speech,  subject,  or  event  is  specified  by  all  the  four  sacred  writers.  The  first 
instance,  perhaps,  is  the  declaration  of  the  Baptist  as  to  the  relation  in  which  he 
stood  to  our  Lord.  With  Matt.  iii.  11  sq.,  Mark  i.  7  sq.,  Luke  iii.  16  sq.,  compare 
John  i.  26,  but  observe  that  the  words  which  are  approximately  the  same  in  the 
four  narratives  were  uttered  on  more  than  one  occasion,  and  to  different  hearers. 
The  second  instance  is  the  narrative  of  our  Lord's  baptism,  which,  as  related  by 
the  Baptist  (John  i.  32),  may  be  compared  with  the  notices  of  the  Synoptical 
writers  (Matt.  iii.  16  sq.,  Mark  i.  10  sq.,  Luke  iii.  21  sq.).  The  third  is  the  account 
of  the  feeding  of  the  five  thousand,  where  John  vi.  1  sq.  is  clearly  parallel  with 
Matt.  xiv.  13  sq.,  Mark  vi.  32  sq.,  Luke  ix.  10  sq.  St.  Feters  profession  of  faith 
in  our  Lord  may  perhaps  be  considered  &  fourth  case;  but  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  occasions  were  different:  the  first  profession  (John  vi.  68)  being 
made  at  Capernaum,  the  second  (Matt.  xvi.  16,  Mark  viii.  29.  Luke  ix.  20)  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Caesarea  Philippi.    See  above,  Lecture  v.  p.  198,  note  2. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  255 

of  the  Gospel  history.  Not  unfrequently  indeed  have  we 
enjoyed  the  privilege  of  the  combined  testimony  of  two 
of  the  sacred  writers,  and  not  much  less  frequently  even 
of  the  first  three;1  but  at  present  anything  like  a  con- 
tinuously concurrent  testimony,  even  in  the  case  of  the 
Synoptical  Gospels,  has  rarely  presented  itself  except  for 
very  limited  periods  of  the  time  over  which  their  records 
extend. 

We  may  verify  this  by  a  brief  retrospect.     We  may 
remember,  for  instance,  how  in  the   earliest 
portions  of  the  Gospel  history  the  appointed     £Z2£££ 
witness  seemed  to  be,  preeminently  though     "°"  "■''  ",e '""*'""" 

7    *  rf  o  five. 

not  exclusively,  St.  Luke,  and  how  again  in 
the  brief  narrative  of  the  early  ministry  in  Judaea  almost 
our  only  guide  was  found  to  be  St.  John.2  It  may  be 
remembered,  further,  that  of  portions  of  our  Lord's  minis- 
try in  eastern  Galilee  we  often  had  the  blessing  of  three 
records,  but  that  in  reference  to  the  order  of  the  events  we 
appeared  to  have  reasons  for  relying  more  on  the  narrative 
of  the  second  and  third  Evangelists  than  on  that  of  the 
more  grouped  records  of  St.  Matthew.3     Of  the  ministry 

1  The  exact  numerical  proportions  in  which  the  discourses,  subjects,  or  events 
specified  by  three  of  the  Evangelists  stand  with  respect  to  those  related  only  by 
two  can  hardly  be  satisfactorily  stated,  owing  to  the  differences  of  opinion  about 
some  of  these  coincidences,  and  still  more  to  the  obvious  fact  that  the  relations 
between  the  three  Synoptical  gospels  are  continually  changing.  As  a  general 
statement.  however,  it  may  be  said  that  the  combined  testimony  of  the  first  three 
delists  preponderates  in  the  narrative  of  the  ministry  in  eastern  Galilee,  but 
that  in  the  narrative  of  the  north-tialiUean  ministry  the  instances  are  not  many 
where  we  have  the  testimony  of  more   than   fiOO, principally  Si.   Matthew.      See 

above,  Lect.  v.  p.  192.  The  u  hole  question  of  these  correspondences  is  one  of  great 
importance,  as  affecting  our  opinion  of  the  origin  and  relations  of  the  first  three 
Gospels,  but  Car  tun  long  to  be  comprised  in  the  limits  of  a  single  note.  The 
attention  of  the  student  may,  however,  be  called  to  the  fact,  that  exact  verbal 
coincidences  arc  much  more  frequent  in  the  recital  of  Words  spoh  n  than  in 
merely  narrativi  portions  ,•  and,  again,  that  the  ratio  of  coincidence  in  narrative 
to  that  in  recital  i-  strikingly  different  in  the  first  three  Evangelists,  the  ratio  in 
St.  .Matthew  being  BS  1  to  a  little  more  than  '_',  in  St.  Marie  as  1  to  4,  and  in  St. 
J. ul.e  a-  l  to  10.  See  especially  the  good  discussion  in  Norton,  Evidi  in--  .*  of  the 
Genuineness  of  the  Gospels,  Vol.  i.  p.239(ed.  2),  where  the  consideration  of  these 
numerical  relations  appears  to  lead  to  satisfactory  results. 

1  Bee  alio-, e  tin-  Important  quotation  from  Eusebius,  Leot.  iv.  p.  1  hi.  note  1. 

3  Sec  above,  Lect.  IV,  p.  ll'J  eq.,  where  a  statement  will  be  found  of  the  four 


256  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

in  northern  Galilee,  we  have  seen  that  but  little  has  been 
recorded  by  the  historian-Evangelist  St.  Luke ;  but  again, 
that  of  our  Lord's  concluding  ministry  in  Judaea  and 
Peraea  we  should  have  known  almost  nothing  if  he  had 
not  been  specially  moved  to  record  that  striking  series 
of  connected  events  and  discourses1  which  occupied  our 
attention  in  the  concluding  part  of  the  foregoing  Lecture. 
Thus  varied  would  seem  to  be  the  general  aspect  of 

those  parts  of  the  inspired  narrative  to  which 
JSSSSSi    we  have  hitherto  confined  our  meditations. 

Now,  however,  we  meet  with  a  striking  and 
yet  not  unlooked-for  change.  If  all  the  three  solemn  pre- 
dictions of  our  Lord's  sufferings  were  thought  to  be  of 
such  moment  that  they  have  been  specially  recorded  by 
all  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists,2  surely  it  would  not 
be  too  much  to  expect  that  the  mournful  record  of  the 
verification  of  those  prophecies  should  be  given,  not  by 
two  only,  or  by  three,  but  by  all.  The  history  of  the  suf- 
ferings whereby  mankind  was  redeemed  must  be  told  by 
no  fewer  in  number  than  the  holy  four.3     The  fulfilment 

principal  reasons  for  adopting  the  order  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  rather  than 
that  of  St.  Matthew.    Compare  also  Lect.  I.  p.  35  sq. 

1  It  has  been  already  implied,  but  may  be  more  distinctly  stated,  that  the  great 
peculiarity  of  the  large  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  extending  from  the  end  of 
the  9th  to  the  middle  of  the  19th  chapter,  is  the  close  connection  that  appears 
to  exist  between  the  incidents  mentioned,  or  alluded  to,  and  the  discourses  which 
followed.  It  would  seem  almost  as  if  the  former  were  only  noticed  as  serving  to 
introduce  and  give  force  to  the  weighty  words  which  followed.  Compare  Luke 
xi.  37  sq.,  xii.  1  sq.,  xiii.  1  sq.,  23  sq.,  xiv.  1  sq.,  xv.  1  sq.,  al.  Some  careful  com- 
ments on  this  portion  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel,  though  not  always  such  as  can  be 
fully  accepted,  will  be  found  in  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxf.  Vol.  ii.  p.  517  sq. 

2  The  prediction  uttered  near  Cajsarea  I'hilippi  is  specified  in  Matt.  xvi.  21  sq., 
Mark  viii.  30  sq.,  and  Luke  ix.  21  sq. ;  the  prediction  near  or  on  the  way  to 
Capernaum,  in  Matt.  xvii.  22  sq.,  Mark  ix.  31  sq.,  Luke  ix.  44;  the  prediction  in 
Perrca  on  the  way  to  Jericho,  in  Matt.  xx.  17  sq.,  Mark  x.  32  sq.,  Luke  xviii. 
31  sq. 

3  It  may  be  noticed  as  a  matter  of  curiosity,  that  the  Apocryphal  Gospels, 
which  we  have  long  lost  sight  of,  now  again  come  before  us.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  an  account  of  our  Lord's  appearance  in  the  temple  when  twelve  years 
old  (Erang.  Ii\f.  Arab.  cap.  50  si!.,  Evang.  Thorn,  cap.  19),  a  few  scattered  notices 
of  our  Lord's  baptism  (see  Hof'mann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  69,  p.  299),  and  the  nan  alive 
of  the  rich  young  man  (see  above,  p.  249.  note  3),  we  meet  with  no  attempts  to 
add  anything  to  the  Gospel  history  since  the  period  of  the  infancy.    Kow,  how- 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  2">7 

of  type  and  shadow,  of  the  hopes  of  patriarchs,  of  the 
expectations  of  prophets,  yea,  and  of  the  dim  longings  of 
a  whole  lost  and  sinful  world,  must  be  declared  by  the 
whole  Evangelistic  company;  the  four  streams  that  go 
forth  to  water  the  earth1  must  here  meet  in  a  common 
channel;  the  four  winds  of  the  Spirit  of  Life2  must  here 
be  united  and  one. 

For  such  a  dispensation  of  wisdom  and  grace,  ere  we 
presume  to  dwell  upon  it,  let  us  offer  up  our  adoring 
t  hanks.  Let  us  bless  God  for  this  fourfold  heritage;  let  us 
praise  the  Eternal  Spirit  that  thus  moved  the  hearts  and 
guided  the  pens  of  these  appointed  witnesses,  and  then 
witli  all  lowliness  and  reverence  address  ourselves  to  the 
momentous  task  of  attempting  so  far  to  combine  their  holy 
narratives  as  to  bring  before  our  minds,  in  all  its  fulness 
and  completeness,  the  record  of  the  six  concluding  days 
of  the  Lord's  earthly  ministry,  —  the  six  days  in  which  a 
world  was  re-created,  and  the  last  fearful  efforts  of  the 
rulers  of  its  darkness  met,  quelled,  and  tri- 

.       ,  _  Eph.vi.12. 

umpned  over  forevermore. 

The  last  incident,  it  will  be  remembered,  to  which  we 
alluded  in  the   preceding   Lecture,  was  the 
short  stay  of  our  Lord  at  Jericho,  and  the     JlgST 
subsequent   journey   to    Bethany.     He   had     "";';      , ,      T 

i  •>  J  J  Lomp.  John  xi.  7. 

now  again  passed  along  the  wild  and  unsafe 

road'5  that  leads  from  the  plain  of  Jericho  to  the  uplands  of 

ever,  in  the  Evangelium  Nicodemiwe  find  the  apocrypha]  narrative  resumed, 
ami  are  famished  with  accounts  (not  wholly  undeserving  of  notice)  of  our  Lord's 
trial,  and  of  the  events  which  followed.  See  Teschendorf,  Evcmg.  Apoer.  p.  203 
sq.,  Bnd  compare  Bofimann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  78  sq. 

i  Jerome,  I'm/,  in  Matt,  cap.  l.  Vol.  vii.  p.  18  (ed.  Migne). 

-  This  second  simile  is  a  modification  of  one  « liich  occurs  in  a  curious  passage 
in  [rensus,  which,  though  not  very  com  facing,  may  bear  citation  as  incidentally 
showing  how  completely  at  that  earlj  age  the  four,  and  only  the /our,  Gos- 
pele  were  accepted  throughout  the  Church.  "  Since  there  are  four  regions  of  the 
world,"  says  this  ancient  writer, " In  which  we  live,  and  four  cardinal  winds, 
and  the  Church  has  become  Bpread  over  the  whole  earth,  and  the  Gospel  is  the 
pillar  and  support  ofthe  Church,  and  the  breath  of  life,  it  is  meet  thai  it  should 
have  tour  pillars  breathing  on  all  sides  inoorruption,  and  refreshing  mankind." 
Adv.  Bar.  ax.  11.,  p.  221  (ed.  Grabe). 

3  This  road,  though  connecting  two  places  of  great  importance,  seems  almost 

22* 


258  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

Judaea,  and  was  now,  possibly  late  on  the  Friday  evening,1 

in  the  abode  of  that  highly-favored  household,  which,  as 

the  fourth   Evangelist  tells  us,  our   Lord  vouchsafed  to 

regard  with  feelings  of  affection   and   love. 

John  xi.  5.  m,  ,  .  ~     . 

,,      .  „        1  here,  in  the  retirement  ot  that  mountain- 

John  xii. !).  ' 

hamlet  of  Bethany,2  —  a  retirement  soon  to 
be  broken  in  upon,  —  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  may 
with  reason  be  supposed  to  have  spent  His  last  earthly 
Sabbath.  There,  too,  either  in  their  own  house,  or,  as  seems 
more  probable,  in  the  house  of  one  who  probably  owed  to 
our  Lord  his  return  to  the  society  of  his  fellow-men,3  did 

that  loving  household  " make  a  supper"  for 

John  xii.  2.  .  °  l  ' 

their  divine  Guest.  Joyfully  and  thankful, y 
did  each  one  of  that  loving  family  instinctively  do  that 
which  might  seem  most  to  tend  to  the  honor  and  glorifica- 
tion of  Him  whom  one  of  them  had  declared  to  be,  and 

always  to  have  been  infested  by  robbers  (Jerome  on  Jerem.  iii.  2),  and  to  have 
been  deemed  notoriously  dangerous  to  the  traveller.  See  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr. 
in  Luc.  x.  30.  It  was  the  scene  of  the  striking  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan, 
and  was  now  being  traversed,  apparently  for  the  second  time  (the  first  being  on 
the  occasion  of  the  sickness  and  death  of  Lazarus),  by  Him  whom  several  writers 
of  the  early  Church  (Origen,  Ambrose,  Augustine,  al.)  regarded  as  shadowed 
forth  by  the  merciful  stranger  of  His  own  parable.  For  an  account  of  the  road, 
see  Thomson,  The  Land  and  The  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  440  sq. ;  and  for  a  very  power- 
ful sketch  of  a  wild  portion  of  it,  with  the  plain  of  Jericho  below,  see  Koberts, 
Holy  Land,  Vol.  ii.   Plate  15. 

1  See  above,  p.  252,  note  2. 

2  The  village  of  Bethany  (according  to  Lightfoot,  ",?.'1!"]  IT'S  "  house  of  dates") 
lies  on  the  eastern  slope  of  Olivet,  in  a  shallow  and  partially  wooded  valley,  and 
in  a  direction  about  E.  S.  E.  from  Jerusalem,  and  at  a  distance  of  about  fifteen 
furlongs  (John  xi.18),  or  between  half  and  three  quarters  of  an  hour  in  time.  It 
is  now  called  "el-'Aziriyeh,"  from  the  tomb  of  Lazarus,  which  is  still  pretended 
to  be  shown  there,  and  is  described  by  travellers  as  a  poor  and  somewhat  forlorn 
hamlet  of  about  twenty  houses.  See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  432  (ed.  2), 
Thomson,  The  Land  and.  the  Book,  Vol.  ii.  p.  599,  Stanley,  Palestine,  p.  188;  and 
for  views  of  it,  Roberts,  Holy  Land,  Vol.  ii.  Plate  13,  Robertson  and  Beato, 
Views  of  Jerusalem,  No.  30,  and  Frith,  Egypt  and  Palestine,  Part  xxiv.  3. 

3  It  has  been  conjectured,  and  perhaps  rightly,  that  Simon  "the  leper,"  at 
whose  house  the  supper  would  seem  to  have  been  prepared  (Matt.  xxvi.  6,  Mark 
xiv.  3),  had  formerly  suffered  under  this  frightful  disease,  and  had  been  healed 
by  our  Lord.  Compare  Meyer  on  Matt.  xxvi.  6.  The  connection  in  which  he 
stood  to  Lazarus  and  his  sisters  is  wholly  unknown  to  us;  according  to  Theophy- 
lact  he  was  the  father  (comp.  Ewald,  Gesch.  Christus'',  p.  357);  according  to  some 
modern  writers,  the  husband  of  Martha  (Greswell,  Dissert.  Vol.  ii.  p.  554),  or,  as 
Beems  perhaps  slightly  more  probable,  a  friend  of  the  family. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  259 

whom  they  all  knew  to  be,  the  Son  of  God1  that  was  to 
come   into    the  world.     So   Martha   serves; 

..  .,,  •iii'i  Jnhn  xi.  27. 

Lazarus,  it  is  specially  noticed,  takes  his  place         (/,  ,„  L,. 
at  the  table,  the  visible,  living  proof  of  the 
omnipotence  of  his  Lord  ;   Mary  performs  the  tender  office 
of  a  mournfully  foreseeing  love,  that  thought 
nought  too  pure  or  too  costly  for  its  God, — 
that  tender  office  which,  though  grudgingly  rebuked  by 
Judas,  and,  alas!    others   than   Judas,   who       j,a„.  .rxri-.  8. 
could  not  appreciate  the  depths   of  such  a       Markxts.*. 

.,  .  1  '      ,      ,  .        _f  .  .   .    ,  Matt.  xxvi.  13. 

devotion,  nevertheless  received  a  praise  which 

it  has  been  declared  shall  evermore  hold  its  place  on  the 

pages  of  the  Book  of  Life.2 

But  that  Sabbath  soon  passed  away.     Ere  night  came 
on,  numbers,  even   of  those  who  were  sel- 

1  />  iit  ix  T  1  1  The   triumphal 

dom  favorably  disposed  to  our  Lord,  now*     «.„,,.„  into  ja-ma, 
came  to  see  both  Him  and  the  living  monu-     *■"*■*»* 
ment    of  His    merciful    omnipotence.       ihe  _    .. 

1  Ver.  11. 

morrow  probably  brought  more  of  these  half- 
curious,  half-awed,  yet,  as  it  would  now  seem  in  a  great 

1  On  the  title  "  Son  of  God  "  see  above,  Lect.  v.  p.  19G,  note  1,  and  also  Lcct. 
vi.  p.  289,  note  1.  It  can  scarcely  be  doubted  that  on  the  occasion  referred  to 
(John  xi.  27)  Martha  had  a  general  if  not  a  theologically  precise  belief  in  our 
Lord's  divinity.  Now,  that  belief  would  naturally  have  become  still  clearer  and 
fuller,  and  probably  evinced  itself  in  all  these  acts  of  duteous  and  loving  service. 

2  For  the  arguments  by  which  it  would  appear  almost  <■<  rtavn  that  the  present 
anointing  is  not  identical  with  that  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  Pharisee  (Luke 
vii.  86),  see  above,  p.  173,  note  2,  and  compare  Ebrard,  Kritik  ii<  r  Evang.  Oesch. 
j  96,  p.  473.  The  incident  is  related  by  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  after  the 
triumphal  entry,  — not  as  having  happened  then,  hut  as  standing  in  suitable 
sonnection  with  the  mention  of  the  betrayal  of  Judas,  the  workings  of  whose 
evil  heart,  as  we  know  from  St.  John,  were  fully  displayed  on  the  occasion  of" 
this  supper.     See  Wicseler.  Sytlopg.  p.  391  sq. 

8  It  seems  reasonable  to  Buppose  that  at  a  time  of  such  large  popular  gather- 
ings the  strict  observance  Of  the  Sabbath-day's  journey  might  In  some  measure 
have  been  relaxed.  Kvcn,  however,  without  this  assumption,  we  may  suppose 
these  eager  visitants  to  have  arrived  at  Bethany  soon  after  the  Sabbath  was 
over,  having  performed  the  permitted  part  of  the  distance  (live  or  six  stades) 
1'  fore  the  Sabbath  legally  ended,  and  the  rest  afterwards.  The  news  that  our 
Lord  was  there  could  easily  have  been  spread  by  those  who  journeyed  with  Him 
from  Ji  richo  on  the  Friday,  and  who  themselves  went  on  direct  to  Jerusalem. 
On  the  length  of  a  Babbath-day's  journey,  see  Winer,  BWB.,  Art.  "Sabbatb- 
Eweg,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  851,  <'H  rwell,  Dissert,  nzvni,  Vol.  iii.  p.  70. 


2G0  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

measure,  believing  visitants.  The  deep  heart  of  the  peo- 
ple was  stirred,  and  the  time  was  fully  come  when  ancient 
prophecy  was  to  receive  its  fulfilment,  and 
the  daughter  of  Zion  was  to  welcome  her 
King.1  Yea,  and  in  kingly  state  shall  He  come.  Begirt 
not  only  by  the  smaller  band  of  His  own  disciples,  but 
by  the  great  and  now  hourly  increasing  multitude,  our 
Lord  leaves  the  little  wooded  vale  that  had  ministered 
to  Him  its  Sabbath-day  of  seclusion  and  repose,  and 
directs  His  way  onward  to  Jerusalem.  As  yet,  however, 
in  but  humble  guise,  and  as  a  pilgrim  among  pilgrims, 
He  traverses  the  rough  mountain-track  which  the  modern 
traveller  can  even  now  somewhat  hopefully  identify ; 2 
every  step  bringing  Him  nearer  to  the  ridge  of  Olivet,  and 
to  that  hamlet  or  district  of  Bethphage,  the  exact  site  of 
which  it  is  so  hard  to  fix,  but  which  was  separated  perhaps 
only  by  some  narrow  valley  from  the  road  along  which  the 
procession  was  now  wending  its  way.3     But  the  Son  of 

1  This  prophecy,  we  are  told  distinctly  by  St.  John  (ch.  xii.  16),  was  not  under- 
stood by  the  disciples  as  now  being  fulfilled  till  after  our  Lord  had  been  glorified. 
The  illumination  of  the  Holy  Ghost  then  enabled  them  both  to  call  to  mind  the 
words  of  this  particular  prophecy  (observe  the  thrice-repeated  raura)  and  to 
recognize  the  occasion  on  which  it  was  thus  signally  fulfilled.  See  Meyer  on 
John  xii.  1G. 

2  See  Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  189  sq.,  where  this  triumphal  entry  is 
extremely  well  described  and  illustrated.  In  deference  to  the  opinion  and  argu- 
ments of  this  observant  traveller,  who  has  himself  seen  and  considered  the 
locality  in  reference  to  the  very  event  we  are  now  considering,  it  has  been 
assumed  in  the  text  that  our  Lord  proceeded,  not  by  the  traditional  route  over 
the  summit  of  Olivet,  but  by  the  most  southern  of  the  three  routes  from  Bethany 
to  Jerusalem.  We  must  not,  however,  forget  that  the  present  appearance  of 
the  city  from  Olivet  and  the  appearance  of  the  city  in  the  time  of  our  Lord, 
when  the  eastern  wall  certainly  ran  much  within  the  present  line  of  wall 
(see  the  plans  by  Ferguson  in  Smith,  Diet,  of  Bible,  Vol.  i.  pp.  1028, 1032),  must 
certainly  have  been  different,  and  that  the  statements  of  the  modern  traveller 
must  always  be  subjected  to  this  correction.  Views  of  the  city  from  Olivet  are 
very  numerous.  See,  however,  especially,  Williams,  Holy  City,  Vol.  i.  Frontis- 
piece, Roberts,  Holy  Land,  Vol.  i.  Plate  4,  1C,  Frith,  Egypt  and  Palestine,  Part 
xviii.  1,  2,  and  for  a  view  of  the  roads  down  the  side  of  Olivet,  Williams,  Vol. 
i.  p.  318,  and  compare  Stanley,  Palestine,  p.  156. 

3  The  site  of  this  village  or  district  has  not  yet  been  satisfactorily  determined. 
See  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  433,  but  compare  also  Van  de  Velde,  Memoir 
to  Map,  p.  297.  The  most  reasonable  view  seems  to  be  that  Bethphage  (S:>5  ^t.' 
"  house  of  figs")  was  a  village  or  hamlet  not  far  from  Bethany,  but  nearer  to 


Lect.  VIE  THE    LAST   PASSOVER.  261 

David   must  not.  solemnly  enter   the  city  of  David  as  a 
scarcely  distinguishable  wayfarer  amid  a  mixed  and  way-, 
faring  throng.     Prophecy  must  have  its  full  and  exact  ful- 
iilmcnt;  the  King  must  approach  the  city  of  the  King  with 
some  meek   symbols  of  kingly  majesty.     With  haste,  it 
would  seem,  two  disciples  are  despatched  to  the  village 
over  against  them,  to  bring  to  Him  "  who 
ha<l  need  of  it"  the  colt  "whereon  yet  never       Lul'exu:. 30. 
man  sat;"  with  haste  the  zealous  followers       £""•* 

V  er.  ay. 

cast  upon  it  their  garments,  and,  all  uncon- 
scious of  the  significant  nature  of  their  act,  place  thereon 
their  Master,  the   coming  King.     Strange  it  would  have 
been  if  feelings  such  as  now  were  eagerly  stirring  in  every 
heart  had    not   found  vent  in  words.     Strange  indeed  if, 
with  the  Hill  of  Zion  now  breaking  upon  their  view,1  the 
long  prophetic  past  had  not  seemed  to  mingle  with  the 
present,  and  evoke  those  shouts  of  mysterious 
welcome   and   praise   which,   first    beginning 
with  the  disciples  and  those  immediately  round  our  Lord,2 
soon  Were  heard  from  every  mouth  of  that  glorifying  mul- 
titude.    And  not  from    them   alone.     Numberless  others 

Jerusalem  (liencc  the  order  in  Mark  xi.  1;  compare  Luke  xix.  29),  and  situated 
at  no  great  distance  from  one  of  the  roads  connecting  these  two  places.  Com- 
pare  Matt.  xxi.  2,  tj/c  kw^tiv  tviV  aTrivavTi  v/noov  ;  Mark  xi.  2,  tt)i>  Ku>fxf\v  t))v 
Ka-rivavn.  v,aa>v  ;  Luke  xix.  30,  t!;i>  KO.riva.vTi  k<I>ix7)v, —  in  all  which  places  Beth- 
phage  appeals  to  he  referred  to.  The  apparently  less  probable  supposition  that 
it  was  a  district  rather  than  a  village,  has  been  advocated  by  Lightibot,  Cent. 
Chorogr.  in  Matt.  cap.  37,  Vol.  ii.  p.  198  (Roterod.  1686).  Comp.  also  Williams, 
Holy  city.  Vol.  ii.  p.  412  eq. 

1  See  Stanley,  Sinai  unit  Palestine,  p.  190,  where  it  is  stated  that,  on  reaching 
the  ridge  of  tin-  southern  slope  of  Olivet,  by  the  road  above  alluded  to,  the  trav- 
eller obtains  a  view  of  Mount  Zion  and  that  portion  of  Jerusalem  which  was 
more  especially  connected  with  the  memory  of  David,  as  the  site  of  his  palace. 
The  temple  anil  the  more  northern  parts  would  not  be  seen  at  present,  being  hid 
from  \  iew  by  an  Intervening  Blope  on  the  right. 

-'  This  would  seem  to  be  the  correct  reconciliation  of  Luke  xix.  37  with  'Matt, 
xxi.  9  and  Mark  xi.  9.  The  disciples  that  were  round  our  Lord  flrsi  raise  the 
jubilant  shouts,  the  multitudes  both  before  and  behind  (Matt.  /.  r.)  take  them 
up  immediately  afterwards.    St.  John  specifies  some  of  the  acclamations,  but 

more  particularly  gives  us  the  subject  of  the  testimony  which  the  multitude  pub- 
licly bare  to  our  Lord,  viz.,  that  lie  had  raised  La/arus  from  the  dead  (eh.  xii. 
17).  and  thus  Incidentally  supplies  the  reason  why  they  PO  readily  joined  in  these 
thouts  of  triumph.    Compare  Ewald,  Oetch.  Clu-istus',  p.  884. 


Ps.  cxi-iii.  2C. 


262  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  Vn. 

there  were  fast  streaming  up  Olivet,  a  palm-branch  in  every 

hand,  to  greet  the  Kaiser  of  Lazarus  and  the 

Conqueror  of  Death.    And  now  all  join.    One 

common   feeling   of  holy  enthusiasm  now  pervades  that 

mighty  multitude,  and   displays    itself  in   befitting  acts. 

Garments  are  torn  off  and  cast  down 1  before 

.xxi.  .  |      Holy  One;    c:reen   boughs  bestrew  the 

Ver.  8.  *  ... 

way ;  Zion's  King  rides  onward  in  meek  maj- 
esty, a  thousand  voices  before  and  a  thousand  voices 
behind  rising  up  to  heaven  with  hosannas  and  with 
mingled  words  of  magnifying  acclamation,  some  of  which 
once  had  been  sung  to  the  Psalmist's  harp, 
and  some  heard  even  from  angelic  tonp-ues. 

Luke  li.  14.  °  ° 

....  But  the  hour  of  triumph  was  the  hour 
of  deepest  and  most  touching  compassion.  If,  as  we  have 
ventured  to  believe,  the  suddenly  opening  view  of  Zion 
may  have  caused  the  excited  feelings  of  that  thronging 
multitude  to  pour  themselves  forth  in  words  of  exalted  and 
triumphant  praise,  full  surely  we  know  from  the  inspired 

narrative  that,  on  our  Redeemer's  nearer  ap- 

Luke  xix.  41.  ,  ,  ■,  -• 

proacn  to  the  city,  as  it  rose  up,  perhaps  sud- 
denly,2 in  all  its  extent  and  magnificence  before  Him  who 

1  Most  of  the  recent  expositors  of  this  passage  have  appropriately  referred  to 
the  curious  incident,  mentioned  by  Dr.  Robinson  (Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  473,  ed.  2), 
of  the  people  of  Bethlehem  casting  their  garments  on  the  way  before  the  horses 
of  the  English  consul  of  Damascus  when  supplicating  his  assistance  and  inter- 
cession. The  same  writer  briefly  illustrates,  by  modern  usage,  the  act  of  the 
disciples  casting  their  cloaks  (why  does  Dr.  Thomson,  in  Smith's  Diet,  of  Bible, 
Yol.  i.  p.  10G4,  go  out  of  his  way  to  specify  them  as  "ragged"?)  upon  the  foal  to 
serve  as  a  saddle.  —Palestine,  Vol.  ii.  p.  219.  Such  is  the  enduring  nature  of 
Eastern  habits. 

2  We  learn  from  Dr.  Stanley  {Sinai  and  Palestine,  p.  191)  that  at  a  particular 
point  of  the  southern  road  the  traveller  reaches  a  ledge  of  smooth  rock  from 
which  the  whole  city,  rising  up,  as  it  were,  "out  of  a  deep  abyss,"  is  suddenly 
beheld  in  all  its  extent.  Compare  the  view  in  Williams,  Holy  City.  Vol.  i.,  Front- 
ispiece, which  seems  to  illustrate  this  description.  It  seems  too  much  to  venture, 
with  Dr.  Stanley,  positively  to  identify  this  spot  with  that  where  the  Saviour 
paused  and  wept,  especially  as  it  is  by  no  means  certain  (see  above,  p.  260,  note 
2)  that  this  was  the  route  actually  taken;  still  we  may  perhaps  permit  ourselves 
to  believe  that  our  Saviour's  affecting  address  was  synchronous  with  and  per- 
haps suggested  by  the  sudden  opening  out  of  some  widely  extended  view  of  the 
inaguiticent  city.    The  view  from  the  summit  of  Olivet  is  noticed  by  Dr.  Robin- 


Lect.  Til.  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  263 

even  now  beheld  the  trenches  cast  about  it,  and  Roman 
legions  mustering  round  its  fated  walls,  tears 

.  .  Ver.  43. 

fell  from  those  divine  eyes;  yea,  the  Saviour 
of  the  world  wept  over  the  city  wherein  lie  had  come  to 
suffer  and  to  die.  .  .  .  The  lengthening  procession  again 
moves  onward,  slowly  descending  into  the  deep  valley  of 
the  Cedron,  and  slowly  winding  up  the  opposite  slope,  until 
at  length,  by  one  of  the  eastern  gates,  it  passes  into  one 
of  the  now  crowded1  thoroughfares  of  the  Holy  City. 

Such  was  the   Triumphal  Entry  into  Jerusalem  ;  such 
the  most  striking  event,  considered  with  ref- 

°  #  fir/leetionrs  on  t/ir 

erence  to  the  nation,  on  which   we  have  as     unkuw  credibility 

.    .         of  the  narrative. 

yet  meditated.  It  was  no  less  than  a  public 
recognition  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth  as  the  long  looked-for 
Messiah,  the  long  and  passionately  expected  theocratic 
King.  Though,  as  the  sequel  shows,  only  transitory  and 
evanescent,  it  was  still  a  recognition,  plain,  distinct,  and 
historical,  and  exactly  of  such  a  nature  as  tends  to  increase 

bod,  and  described  as  "not  particularly  interesting,"  and  as  embracing  little 
more  than  a  "dull,  mixed  mass  of  root's  and  domes."  —  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  23G 
(ed.  2). 

l  It  is  now  hardly  possible  to  form  a  just  conception  of  the  appearance  which 
Jerusalem  and  its  vicinity  must  have  presented  at  the  season  of  the  Passover. 
All  the  open  ground  near  the  city,  and  perhaps  the  sides  of  the  very  hill  down 
which  our  Lord  had  recently  passed,  were  now,  probably,  being  covered  with 
the  tents  and  temporarily  erected  structures  of  the  gathering  multitudes,  who 
even  thus  early  would  have  most  likely  found  every  available  abode  in  the  city 
completely  full.  We  are  not  left  without  some  data  of  the  actual  amount  of  1  lie 
gathered  numbers,  as  we  have  a  calculation  of  Josephus,  based  upon  the  num- 
ber of  lambs  sacrificed  (256,500),  according  to  which  it  would  appear  that  even  at 
the  r<  ry  low  estimate  of  ten  persons  to  each  lamb,  the  number  of  people  assem- 
bled must  have  been  little  short  of  two  millions  seven  hundred  thousand,  with- 
out taking  into  consideration  those  that  were  present  but  incapacitated  by  legal 
Impurities  from  being  partakers  in  the  sacrifice.  See  Bell.Jud.  vi.  9.  3,  and 
compare  Bell.  Jud.  n.  11.  3.  where  the  number  is  with  more  probability  set  down 
at  about  three  millions.  There  would  thus  have  been  present  not  much  short  of 
half  of  the  probable  population  of  Judaea  and  Galilee.  .See  G  res  well,  Dissert. 
xxin.  Append.  Vol.  iv.  p.  494.  These  observations  arc  not  without  importance, 
considered  theologically.  They  show  that  our  Lord's  rejection  and  death  is  not 
merely  to  be  laid  to  the  malevolence  of  the  party  of  the  Sanhedrin,  and  to  the 

wild  clamors  of  a  city  mob,  but  may  justly  be  Considered,  though  done  in  partial 

Ignorance  (Acts  hi.  17),  the  act  of  the  nation.  When  Pilate  made  his  proposal,  it 
was  tn  the  multitude  (Mark  xv.  9),  and  that  multitude  we  know  was  unanimous 
(John  xvili.  40). 


26-4  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

in  the  highest  degree  our  convictions  of  the  living  truth 
of  the  inspired  narrative.  Let  us  pause  a  moment  only  to 
observe  how  marvellously  it  sets  forth  no  less  the  sacred 
dignity  than  the  holy  decorum  of  the  accepted  homage. 
Let  us  only  observe  with  wonder  and  reverence  how  not  a 
single  prerogative  of  the  Messiah  was  waived  or  foregone, 
and  how  not  even  the  most  bitter  opponent  of  the  truth1 
can  dare,  with  any  show  of  reason  or  justice,  to  assert  that 
the  faintest  appeal  was  here  made  to  the  prejudices  or 
passions  of  the  multitude.  Let  us  mark,  on  the  one  hand, 
how,  ere  the  multitude  begin  to  greet  their  Lord  with  the 
words  of  a  Messianic  psalm,2  He  Himself  vouchsafes  them 
a  Messianic  sign,  and  how,  when  the  Pharisees  urge  our 
Lord  to  silence    the    commencing   acclama- 

Zuke  xix.  39. 

tions,  He  refuses  with  an  answer  at  once 
decided  and  sublime.  Let  us  mark  again,  on  the  other 
hand,  how  the  object  of  all  that  jubilant  reverence  shows 
in  the  plainest  way  the  spiritual  nature  of  His  triumph 
and  of  His  kingdom,  when  on  His  nearer  approach  He 
pauses  and  weeps  over  the  city  to  which  He  was  advanc- 
ing with  such  kingly  majesty.  Was  this  the  way  to  appeal 
to  the  political  passions  of  the  multitude?  "Was  this  what 
worldly  prudence  would  have  suggested  as  the  most  hope- 
ful mode  of  assuming  the  attributes  of  such  a  Messiah 


1  The  various  objections  in  detail  which  modern  scepticism  has  endeavored  to 
bring  against  the  inspired  narrative  do  not  appear  in  any  way  to  deserve  our 
attention,  or  require  any  further  confutation  thau  they  have  already  received. 
For  notices  of  them,  and  short  but  sufficient  answers,  see  Ebrard,  Kritik  cler 
Evang.  Gesch.  §  97,  p.  476.  The  general  objection,  however,  or  rather  false 
representation,  alluded  to,  and  briefly  discussed  in  the  text,  deserves  a  passing 
notice  and  exposure.  It  was  advanced,  towards  the  close  of  the  last  century,  by 
the  compiler  of  the  notorious  Wolfenblittel  Fragments,  and  has  often  been 
repeated  in  later  sceptical  writings.  When  we  read  the  inspired  accounts,  and 
observe  how  they  incidentally  disclose  everything  that  was  most  opposed  to 
political  demonstration,  it  may  seem  doubtful  whether  the  impiety  of  such  a 
theory  is  not  even  exceeded  by  its  improbability  and  its  total  want  of  all  histor- 
ical credibility. 

2  The  comment  of  Hilary  is  not  without  point:  "  Laudationis  verba  redemp- 
tionis  in  eo  exprimunt  potestafem,  nam  Osanna  Hebraico  sermone  signiflca- 
tur  redemptio  [domus  David].'' —  Comment,  in  Matt.  Canon  xxi.  p.  567  (Paris 
1631). 


Lect.  VII.  TIIE   LAST  PASSOVER.  265 

as  was  then  looked  for  by  popular  enthusiasm?1  No,  it 
cannot  be.  Here  at  least  let  scepticism  fairly  own  that 
it  is  at  fault  —  plainly,  palpably  at  fault.  If  it  affects  to 
value  truth,  let  it  own  that  here  at  least  there  is  a  sober 
reality  wholly  irreconcilable  with  assumptions  of  mistaken 
enthusiasm  or  political  adventure,  here  a  life  and  a  truth 
with  which  the  subtlest  combinations  of  thought  could 
never  have  animated  a  mythical  narrative. 

But  let  as  pass  onward.   No  sooner  had  our  Lord  entered 
the  city  than  all  was  amazed  inquiry  and 
commotion.     The  recognition,  as  far  as  we     ^j^LT^ 
can  infer  from  the  sacred  narrative,  would 
seem  to  have  been  speedy  and  general;2  not  indeed  in 
those  exalted  strains  which  had  just  been  heard  on  Olivet, 
yet  still  in  a  manner  which  probably  served  to  show  how 
true  was  the  bitter  admission  of  the  Pharisees  one  to  an- 
other, that  the  whole  "world  had  gone  after 
Him,"  and  that  all  their  efforts  were  at  present 
of  no  avail.     Yet  by  no  outward  acts,  if  we  adopt  what 
seems  on  the  whole  the  most  probable  connection  of  the 
sacred  narrative,'5  did  our  Lord  as  yet  respond  to  those 


l  It,  perhaps,  cannot  be  doubted  that  at  the  present  time  numbers  trusted  that 
they  beheld  in  our  Lord  the  mighty  Deliverer  and  Restorer  whose  advent  was 
so  earnestly  and  so  eagerly  looked  for.  See  Luke  xxiv.  21,  and  compare  Acts 
i.  6.  Still  it  seems  by  no  means  improbable  that  with  all  this  there  was  also  such  a 
growing  feeling  that  the  expected  kingdom  was  to  be  at  least  as  much  of  a  spir- 
itual as  of  a  temporal  nature  (compare  Luke  xix.  11),  that  even  the  most  enthu- 
siastic did  not  perhaps  generally  associate  with  the  Lord's  present  triumphal 
entry  many  well-defined  expectations  of  purely  political  results  and  successes. 
Comp.  EwaJd,  Qtach.  Christ  us1,  p.  381.  The  nature  of  their  acclamations  seems 
confirmatory  of  this  view. 

-'  We  may  observe  the  characteristic  way  in  which  the  inquiry  is  made  and  the 
answer  returned.  The  people  in  the  city  at  present  share  but  little  in  the  enthu- 
(-iiisin  of  the  entering  multitudes;  their  only  question  is,  Tij  la-riv  outos  (Matt. 
xxi.  10).  The  answer  is  given  by  the  Sx^oi,  mainly,  as  it  would  seem,  though 
probably  not  exclusively  those  who  were  now  accompanying  our  Lord,  and  not 
perhaps  without  a  tinge  of  provincial  and  local  pride:  Out6s  (irrty  6  -Kpo(py]Tt)S 
'Irjffovs  [Rec.  'l7j<roCs  6  irpo(pT}Ti}s]  <5  avb  Na(,*ape&  t~)S  TaAiXaias.  See  Meyer 
in  lor.  p.  889 (ed.  4). 

Ii  m-iiiis  slightly  doubtful  whether,  with  Robinson,  we  arc  to  place  the 
cleansing  of  the  temple  on  the  same  day  as  our  Lord's  triumphal  entry,  or 
whether,  with  Lightfoot,  Wieseler,  al.,  we  arc  to  refer  it  to  the  following  day. 

23     • 


266  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

excited   feelings.     All  we  read   is   that   He  entered   the 
temple,  and  in  one  comprehending  gaze1  be- 
held all  things,  —  all  the  mercenary  desecra- 
tion to  which  the  needs  of  the  festal  season  had  given 
fresh  impulse,2  and  which  on  the  morrow  must  solemnly 
be  purged  away.     When  all  was  surveyed, 
evening  was  now  come,  and  with  the  small 
company  of  the  Twelve  our  Lord  returned  to  the  quiet  of 
the  upland  village  which  He  had  left  with  such  a  mighty 
multitude  but  a  few  hours  before. 

Early  on  the   following  morning,  as  we  learn  from  a 

comparison  of  the  narratives  of  St.  Matthew 

The  cursing  of     an(j  gt  Mark,  our  Lord  set  forth  from  Beth- 

the  barren  Jig-tree  > 

(Monday).  any?   with    the   intention,   we   may   humbly 

ch  ^fi™'         presume,  of  reaching  the  temple  before  any 

great  influx  of  worshippers  could  have  been 

found   in   its   courts.     The    inspection    of  the   preceding 

■    day   had   shown   only  too   clearly  that   the 

Ver.U.  J  J  J 

sanctity  of  His  Father's  house  must  again 
be  vindicated,  and  that  the   unholy  and  usurious3  traffic 


The  former  view  is  most  in  accordance  with  the  connection  of  St.  Matthew's 
narrative,  and  is  partially  supported  by  the  notice  of  the  children  crying  in  the 
temple,  which  might  seem  but  a  continuation  of  what  had  happened  on  the  way. 
Still,  the  very  distinct  note  of  time  (ttj  iirav^iov,  ch.  xi.  12)  supplied  by  St. 
Mark,  coupled  with  his  precise  notice  of  the  lateness  of  the  hour  when  our  Lord 
finished  His  survey  the  preceding  evening  (ch.  xi.  11),  leads  us  here  to  adopt  the 
generally  safe  rule,  in  cases  of  disputed  order,  of  giving  the  preference  to  the 
narrative  of  that  Evangelist  who  has  been  moved  to  supply  a  special  rattier  than 
a  merely  general  note  of  the  time  when  any  event  occurred.  The  hypothesis 
that  the  cleansing  of  the  temple  commenced  on  the  afternoon  of  the  Sunday, 
and  was  continued  on  the  following  day,  is  noticed,  but  rightly  rejected,  by 
Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxix.  Vol.  iii.  p.  99  sq. 

1  On  the  use  of  this  peculiar  term  by  St.  Mark,  see  Da  Costa,  Four  Witnesses, 
p.  122,  and  compare  Lect.  I.  p.  39,  note  1. 

2  See  LightfootrJffbr.  Hebr.  in  Matt.  xxi.  12,  who  mentions  that  the  place 
where  this  traffic  was  carried  on  was  called  rvan  ("Tabernas  "),  and  was  in  the 
spacious  court  of  the  Gentiles.     Compare  Descr.  Tempi,  cap.  IX.  Vol.  i   p.  565. 

3  See  Lightfoot,  Hor.  TIehr.  in  Matt.  xxi.  12,  where  there  are  some  valuable 
Rabbinical  citations  illustrative  of  the  koWv&kttoX  and  their  practices.  The 
following  seems  to  show  that  the  agio  exacted  in  changing  common  money  yito 
sacred,  or  the  shekel  into  two  half-shekels,  was  great:  "  Quanti  valoris  est  istud 
lucrum?    Tunc  temporis  cum  deuarios  pcrsolverent  pro  Hemisiclo,  Kolbon  [vel, 


Lhct.  VII.  THE    LAST    PASSOVER.  2b  i 

which   was   now  being   carried   on  within    its  walla   must 
again1  be  purged  out  of  the  hallowed  precincts.     On  the 
way,  He,  who  was  truly  flesh  of  our  flesh  and  bone  of  our 
bone,  felt  the  weakness  of  the   nature   He  vouchsafed   to 
assume.     lie  hungered,  wc  are  told  by  the       xatt.xxi.ia. 
first  two   Evangelists,  and  turned  to  a  way-       jf«*asi.i& 
side   fig-tree  to  see  if  haply  there  was  the       *■*«*■» 
fruit  thereon  of  which  the  early  show  of  leaves,  though  not 
the  season  of  the  year,2  gave   such  ostentatious  promise. 


lucrosus  reditus  nunimul.trio  pensus]  fuit  dimidium  Meae,  hoc  est  pars  duodecima 
denarii:  ef  nunquam  minus." — Tolm.  "Shekalim,"  cap.  3.  For  a  description 
of  the  sacred  shekel,  compare  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  15,  p.  37. 

i  The  purging  of  the  temple,  mentioned  by  St.  .John  (ch.  ii.  13  sq.),  is  rightly 
regarded  bj  <  brysostom,  most  of  the  older,  and  nearly  all  the  best  recent  expos- 
itors, as  different  from  the  present.  It  took  place  at  the  Passover,  a.  v.  c.  781,  or 
two  years  before  the  present  time.  See  above,  Lect.  in.  p.  122.  The  vindication 
of  the  sanctity  and  honor  of  His  Father's  house  was  thus  one  of  our  Lord's  ear- 
liest as  well  as  one  of  His  latest  public  acts.  On  the  difficulties  which  some 
interpreters  have  felt  in  the  performance  of  this  authoritative  act  by  our  Lord, 
especially  on  the  first  occasion,  see  above,  p.  122,  note  3. 

•-  Much  difficulty  has  been  felt  at  the  partially  parenthetical  clause,  Mark  xi.  13, 
6  yap  xaipbs  ovk  -fiv  (tvk&v  (Tixcli.),  or  ov  yap  i\v  Kaipbs  ovkmv  (lice).  From 
this,  it  has  been  urged,  we  are  to  conclude  that  our  Lord  could  not  have  expected 
to  find  figs  on  the  tree,  and  consequently  that  the  curse  pronounced  on  it  is  less 
easy  to  be  accounted  for.  A  close  attention  to  the  exact  words  of  the  original, 
c  imbined  with  the  notices  of  modern  travellers,  seems  completely  to  remove  all 
Uiliiculty.  St.  Mark  tells  us  distinctly  that  our  Lord  saw  a  fig-tree  ixov(Tal' 
<pv\\a  (ver.  13),  i.  c,  affording  the  usual  though  in  the  present  case  extremely 
early  evidence  that  fruit  was  certainly  to  be  looked  for,  the  latter  regularly  pre- 
c  >ding  the  leaves.  .See  Thomson,  The  Land  and  the  Book,  Vol.  i.  p.  588,  from 
\  horn  we  learn  that  in  a  sheltered  spot  tigs  of  an  early  kind  may  occasionally  bo 
found  ripe  as  soon  as  the  beginning  of  April.  Compare  a  No  Winer,  fi  WB.  Art. 
'•  Feigenbaum,"  Vol.  i.  p.  867,  Greswell,  Dissert,  xxxix.  Vol.  iii.  p.  91.  Our  Lord 
approaches  the  tree  U)  see  et  dpa,  if,  as  was  reasonable  to  expect  under  such  cir- 
eumstances  (Klotz,  Devar.  p.  178  sq.),  fruit  was  to  be  found.  He  finds  nothing 
except  leaves,  —  leaves,  not  fruit;  whereas,  if  it  had  been  later,  and  the  regular 
sea. hi,  lie  would  have  found  fruit  and  not  leaves,  and  would  not  have  been 
attracted  by  the  unseasonable  appearance  of  the  tree.  See  Mej  er,  Komnu  nt.  ub. 
Mark.  p.  131,  whose  general  explanation  ot'  the  passage  is  reasonable  and  satis- 
factory. The  ordinary  supposition  that  these  were  leaves  of  the  preceding  year, 
and  that  what  our  Lord  expected  was  fruit  of  the  same  year  (see  UghtfOOt,  //"/'. 
lli  br.  in  Matt .  xxi.  1'J),  is  by  no  means  probable,  as  the  connection  between  the 
presence  Of  leaves  and  absence  of  fruit  is  thus  wholly  hist,  the  curse  Hot 
BO  ounted  lor  (the  tree  might  have  once  had  figs  Which  Others  had  now  plucked 
off),  and,  lastly,  the  tone  of  the  clause  ou  yap  k.  t.  a.  either  explained  away 
f.N'oii  stride  et  solum  ralioiiem  reddit,  CUT  fiCUS  nun  inveiierit;  sed  ratioiieui 
reddit  totius  actionis,  cur  scilicet  in  munte  isto,  ficubus  abundanti,  imam  tantuui 


268  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  '  Lect.  VII. 

Hapless  tree  !  emblem  of  a  still  more  hapless  nation.  The 
dews  of  heaven  had  fallen  upon  it,  the  sunlight  had  fos- 
tered it,  the  sheltering  hill-side  had  protected  it ;  all  sea- 
sonable influences  had  ministered  to  it,  and,  even  as  it  had 
been  with  the  mercies  of  Jehovah  to  His  chosen  people, 
all  had  been  utterly  in  vain.  Nay,  worse  than  in  vain ;  the 
issue  was  a  barrenness  that  told  not  merely  of  frustrated 
but  of  perverted  influences;  gifts  from  the  God  of  nature 
received  only  to  issue  forth  in  unprofitable  and  deceptive 
produce ;  not  in  the  fruit  of  His  appointment,  but  in 
pretentious  and  unseasonable  leaves.  Why,  then,  are  we 
to  pause  for  reasons,  or  to  seek  about  for  any  further  expla- 
nation of  what  is  at  once  so  suggestive  and  so  intelligible  ? 
Why  marvel  we  that,  like  the  watered  earth,  "that  bringeth 
not  forth  herbs  meet  for  the  use  of  man,"  but 
beareth  only  thorns  and  briers,  that  emblem- 
atic tree  was  now  "nigh  unto  cursing,"  and  that  its  end 
was  to  be  burned  ?x 

It  was  probably  still  early  when   our  Lord  reached  the 

temple.     Its  present  desecration  might  pos- 

JSFJZ    sibly  not  have  been  so  great  in  every  respect 

works   of  mccy  -t  j     j  \)ecn  two  years  before.     Still  it  is 

performed  there.  J 

clear  that  nearly  every  evil  practice  had  been 
resumed.  Buyers  and  sellers  were  there,  usurious  money- 
changers were  there ;   all  was  well-nigh  as  of  old.     Meet 


viderit,  cui  folia  talia,"  — Lightfoot)  or  completely  lost.  Explanations  such  as 
those  of  Lange  (Leben  Jesu,  Fart  n.  p.  321),  Sepp  (Leben  Christi,  Vol.  iii.  p.  219), 
and  others,  according  to  which  Kaipbs  is  amplified  to  mean  "  favorable  season," 
or  "  favorable  locality,"  appear  wholly  untenable. 

1  The  above  comments  seem  fully  sufficient  to  meet  the  open  or  tacit  objections 
against  this  "  destructive  act,  and  that  on  a  tree  by  the  wayside,  the  common 
property  "  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  ch.  vn.  Vol.  i.  p.  309).  Those  who 
advance  such  objections  would  do  well  to  remember  the  sensible  remarks  of 
Chrysostom:  "  Whenever  any  such  act  takes  place,  either  in  respect  of  places, 
plants,  or  things  without  reason,  be  not  over-precise  in  thy  comments,  and  do 
not  say,  '  How  then  with  justice  was  the  fig-tree  made  to  wither  away  V  ...  for  it 
is  the  extreme  of  folly  to  make  such  remarks.  Look  rather  at  the  miracle,  aud 
admire  and  glorify  Him  who  wrought  it."  —  In  Matt.  Horn,  lxvii.  Vol.  vii.  p. 
746.  On  the  miracle  generally,  see  the  good  comments  of  Hall,  Contempt.  IV.  2G, 
and  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  435. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  269 

then  was  it  that   by  authoritative  acts  no  less  than  in 
inspired   words  it  should  be  proclaimed   in 
the  face  of  all  men  that  God's  house  was  not       j^vHu. 
for  thievish  gains,1  but  for  worship  ;    not  for 
Jewish  buying  and  selling,  but  for  the  prayers  of  all  tho 
scattered  children  of  God.-    Meet  was  it  that,  as  at  the 
first  Passover  of  our  Lord's  ministry,  so  at  His  last,  the 
majesty  of  the  eternal  Father  should  be  thus  openly  glori- 
fied by  the  acts  of  His  eternal  Son.     And  not  by  these 
only.     Deeds  of  mercy  followed  deeds  of  necessity.     The 
blind  came  to  Him  and  received  their  sight ; 

°  Matt.  xxi.  14. 

the  lame   walked,  yea,  even  before  the  un- 
believing eyes  of  the  very  chief  priests  and  scribes  who,  as 
we  learn  from   St.  Mark,  had  heard  of  the 

Ch.  xi.  18. 

Lord's  presence  in  the  temple,  and  were  now 

seeking  to  find  an  opportunity  of  destroying  Him3  whom 

now,  more  than   ever,  they  were  regarding  with  mingled 

hatred  and  apprehension.    At  present  it  was  in  vain.    The 

children   round   them  glorifying  the  Son  of 

David,  the  attentive  and  awe-stricken  mul-       iiarkxiv.is. 

titude  hanging  on  the  words  and  deeds  of 

Him  whom  they  had  welcomed  yesterday  with  cries  that 

1  See  above,  p.  266,  note  3. 

2  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  the  words  iraai  rot?  e&vtcriu,  which  duly  express 
the  spirit  of  the  prophecy  referred  to,  are  only  found  in  St.  Mark  (ch.  xi.  17). 
The  addition  would  not  seem  due  to  any  greater  care  in  St.  Mark's  mode  of  cita- 
tion (I)i'  Wette),  but  as  suggested  by  the  general  character  of  his  Gospel  and  its 
more  general  destination  for  Gentile  readers. 

3  It  is  perhaps  scarcely  safe  to  make  definite  historical  deductions  from  finer 
shades  of  grammatical  distinction  which  may  not  have  been  fully  recognized  by 
the  writers |  still  the  student's  attention  may  be  called  to  Mark  xi.  18,  itfyrow 
\oi  d/>xtePe'*  Koi  ol  ypa/j.fj.a.Tf7s]  irws  ainbv  diroAfcraxrii',  where  the  tense 
adopted,  iaiokiffwriv  [Titch.,  Lachm.,  with  the  four  leading  MSS.),  or  airo\t- 
aovaw  [Ree.  with  later  M.SS.),  will  modify  the  view  taken  of  the  conduct  of  the 
members  of  the  Sanhedrin.  If  we  adopt  the  subjunctive,  the  meaning  will  sim- 
ply be  ••  how  they  should  kill  Bim,"  how  they  should  carry  out  the  design  they 
were  now  entertaining;  if  the  future, —  which,  however,  critically  considered, 
seems  less  pi  obable,  —  the  meaning  will  be,  "  how  they  shall  kill  Him,"  how  they 
shall  accomplish  a  design  already  definitely  formed  and  agreed  upon,  and  now 
considered  only  In  reference  to  the  "  modus  operandi."  On  this  distinction,  see 
Winer,  Gr.  $  41.  a,  p.  266  (cd.  6),  and  compare  Stalbaum  on  l'lato,  Sympos.  p. 

23* 


270  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

their  children  were  now  reiterating,  all  clearly  told  the 

party  of  the  Sanhedrin  that  their  hour  —  the  hour  of  the 

powers   of  darkness  —  had    not   vet     come. 

Luke  xxii.  53.  x  J 

One    effort   they   make ;   reproachfully   they 
ask  Him  if  He  hears,  if  He  accepts  these  cries  of  hom- 
age, plainly  implying  what  the  Pharisees  had 
att.xm.1        openly  demanded  on  the  Mount  of  Olives 

Luke  xuc.  39.  r  J 

the  day  before,  that  such  demonstrations 
should  be  silenced.1  But  neither  then  nor  now  is  it  meet 
that  the  jubilant  accents,  whether  of  loving  or  of  innocent 
lips,  should  be  hushed  and  checked.     Nay,  prophecy  must 

have  its  fulfilment.  With  the  pertinent  words 

Ps.  viii.  2.  ,  . 

of  a  Psalm,  of  which  the  deeper  meaning  and 
application  was  now  fully  disclosed,  our  Lord  leaves  the 
temple  and  city  and  returns  again  to  Bethany. 

On  the  morrow,  and,  as  St.  Mark  tells  us,  early  in  the 

Answers  to  the     day,  our  Lord  and  His  disciples  take  their 

SSS^TiS-     way   t0    Jerusalem.      Much   there    awaited 

dav)-  them.     The  day  preceding  had  been  marked 

cii.  xi.  20.  by  manifestations  of  divine  power,  as  shown 

forth  in  deeds,  and  wondrous  works ;  the  present  day  was 
to  be  the  witness  of  divine  wisdom,  as  shown  forth  in 
words  and  discourses.     It  was  a  day  that  our  Lord  fore- 

1  The  present  feelings  of  these  evil  men  are  very  distinctly  put  before  us  by  the 
comment  of  St.  Mark,  i<po/3owTo  yap  avrov,  ch.  xi.  18.  Formerly  it  was  the 
hostility  of  a  hypocrisy  which  saw  its  real  principles  of  action  exposed,  and  of 
a  party  spirit  which  deemed  its  prerogatives  interfered  with  or  disregarded. 
Now  there  is  a  positive  apprehension,  founded,  probably,  ou  the  recent  recep- 
tion of  our  Lord  by  the  populace,  that  their  own  power  will  be  soon  wholly  set 
aside,  and  that  the  prophet  of  Nazareth  will  become  the  theocratic  leader  of  the 
nation.  Even  the  heathen  Pilate  recognized  the  true  motive  of  their  actions; 
f)8ei  yap  on  5  i  a.  (p&ovoi/  irapi^u>Kav  a\n6v,  Matt,  xxvii.  18.  The  present 
behavior  of  the  people,  as  Cyril  of  Alexandria  has  well  observed,  ought  to  have 
led  to  a  very  different  result :  "  And  does  not  this,  then,  make  the  punishment  of 
the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  Jewish  ranks,  more  heavy, 
—  that  the  whole  people,  consisting  of  unlearned  persons,  hung  upon  the  sacred 
doctrines,  and  drank  in  the  saving  word  as  the  rain,  and  were  ready  to  bring 
forth  also  the  fruits  of  faith,  and  place  their  neck  under  His  commandments? 
But  they  whose  office  it  was  to  urge  on  their  people  to  this  very  thing  savagely 
rebelled,  and  wickedly  sought  the  opportunity  for  murder,  and  with  unbridled 
violence  ran  upon  the  rocks,  not  accepting  the  faith,  and  wickedly  hindering 
others  also."—  Commentary  on  St.  Luke,  Serai,  cxxxn.  Part  u.  p.  615  (Transl.). 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  271 

knew  would  be  marked  by  rapidly  changing  incidents,1  by 
every  varied  form  of  stratagem,  by  hypocritical  question- 
ings and  insidious  inquiry ;  it  was  to  be  a  day  of  last  and 
most  solemn  -warnings,  of  deepest  and  most  momentous 
prophecies.  Early  must  it  needs  be  that  He  go,  late  that 
He  return.  Ere  they  reach  Jerusalem  the  hapless  emblem 
of  that  city  and  its  people  meets  the  eyes  of  the  disciples. 
The  fig-tree,  as  the  graphic  St.  Mark  tells  us, 
was  withered  from  its  very  roots.  The  won- 
dering question  that  was  called  forth  by  such  an  exhibition 
of  the  power  of  their  Master  over  the  material  world  re- 
ceives its  practical  answer  in  the  solemn  reiteration  of 
words  first  uttered  by  way  of  gentle  reproof 

.,       i     n  ,  .1  3tatl.xvu.20. 

some  months  before,  and  now  again,  by  way 

of  instruction,  declaring  the  omnipotence  of  perfect  and 

unwavering   faith.2      They   pass   onward   to   the    temple, 

1  To  the  present  clay  (Tuesday)  are  assigned,  by  most  of  the  leading  harmonists, 
all  t lie  events  and  discourses  comprised  in  Matt.  xxi.  20 — xxv.  40,  Mark  xi.  20— 
xiii.  37,  Luke  xx.  1— xxi.  38,  and  apparently  (see  below,  p.  280)  John  xii.  20—30, 
with  the  recapitulatory  remarks  and  citations  of  the  Evangelist,  ver.  37 — SO.  We 
have  thus,  mi  this  important  day,  the  answer  to  the  deputation  from  the  San- 
hedrin,  and  the  three  parables  which  followed  it;  the  answer  to  the  Pharisees 
and  llerodians  about  the  tribute-money,  to  the  Sadducees  about  the  woman 
with  seven  husbands,  and  to  the  scribe  about  the  greatest  commandment ;  the 
question  put  to  the  Pharisees  about  the  Messiah,  and  the  severely  reproving  dis- 
course in  reference  to  them  and  the  scribes;  the  praise  of  the  poor  widow;  the 
words  uttered  in  the  presence  of  the  Greeks  who  sought  to  see  our  Lord,  aud 
the  last  prophecies  in  reference  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  end  of 
the  world,  with  the  accompanying  parable  of  the  Ten  Virgins.  See  Wieselcr, 
i  in-tin.  8y flops,  p.  393  sq.,  aud  Grcswcll.  Dissert.  XL.  Vol.  iii.  p.  109  sq.,  who, 
however,  conceives  the  day  to  be  Wednesday,  and  also  diners  in  lixing  the  inci- 
dent of  the  Greeks  on  the  day  of  the  triumphal  entry.  The  view  of  Milmau 
(/lis/.  <>/  Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p.  311  note),  that  some  of  the  discourses,  c  g.,  the 
answer  to  the  Pharisees  and  llerodians,  and  what  followed,  belong  to  a  day  sub- 
seqnenl  to  thai  on  which  the  answer  was  made  to  the  deputation  from  the  San- 
liedrin,  has  very  little  in  its  favor. 

-  The  addition  of  the  verse  in  St.  Mark  (ch.  xi.  25)  on  the  duty  and  necessity 
of  showing  a  forgiving  spirit,  especially  when  offering  up  prayer  to  God  (comp. 
Matt.  \  j.  li),  has  been  judged  by  Meyer  and  others  as  due  to  the  Evangelist,  and 
OB  not  tunning  a  part  of  our  Lord's  present  words.  This  seems  a  very  uncalled- 
for  assumption.  The  preceding  declaration  of  the  prevailing  nature  of  the  prayer 
of  faith  leads  our  Lord  to  add  a  warning,  which  a  possible  misunderstanding  of 
the  miracle  Just  performed  might  suggest  as  necessary,  \'\/..,  that  this  efficacy  of 
prayer  was  not  to  be  used  against  others,  even  though  they  might  be  thought 
justly  to  deserve  our  animadversion.     Compare  Stier,  Disc,  qf  our  Lord,  Vol.  iii. 


272  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

where    already,    early   as    it   was,   many   were    gathered 

together   to   hear  the   teaching  of  life   and 

and  compwe  Luke     those  glad  tidings  of  the  Gospel  which  now, 

"' "a  rr  -0  as  St.  Luke  incidentally  informs  us,  formed 

Lide xu:  i$.       the  subject  of  our  Lord's  addresses  to  His 

fcbr.&i&        eager  and  wondering  hearers.     But,  as  since, 

so  then  was  the  Gospel  to  some  a  savor  of 

death  unto  death.     The  Lord's   preaching   is   broken    in 

upon,  by  a  formal  deputation  from  the  Sanhedrin,1  with 

two  questions  fair  and  specious  in  their  general  form,  and 

yet  most  mischievously  calculated  to  call  forth  an  answer 

that  might  be  twisted  into  a  charge,  —  "By what  authority 

was  He  doing  these  things?"2  and  "From 

Matt.xxi.SO.  ^  .  -nut-. 

whom  did  He  receive  it?  But  question 
must  be  met  by  question.  Ere  the  Messiah  declares  the 
nature  of  His  mission,  He  must  be  told  in  what  aspects 
the  mission  of  His  forerunner  was  regarded.  Was  that 
without  higher  sanction,  unaccredited,  unauthorized,  — 
from  men  or  from  heaven  ?     Let  the  spiritual  rulers  of  the 

nation  answer  that  question,  and  then  in  turn 
Jr'  _  shall  answer  be  made  to  them.     The  sequel 

Vcr.  ST.  _     1 

we  well  remember:  the  shrewdly-weighed 
alternatives,  the    necessary   admission,  "They  could    not 

p.  105,  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  II.  6.  6,  p.  1212.  That  our  Lord  should  have  uttered 
the  same  words  on  another  and  earlier  occasion,  and  should  now  be  pleased  to 
repeat  them,  involves  nothing  that  is  either  unlikely  or  even  unusual.  See  Lect. 
iv.  p.  170,  note  2. 

1  This  seems  clearly  implied  by  St.  Mark's  mention  of  the  three  component 
parts  of  the  supreme  court,  tpyovrai  irpbs  avTov  ol  apxicpeTs  ko.\  ol  ypau.fxa.Tels 
ical  ol  TrpeaSi'/Tepoi,  ch.  xi.  27.  Compare  Matt.  xxi.  23,  Luke  xx  1.  For  a  good 
account  of  these  three  sections  of  the  Sanhedrin,  the  first  of  which  was  com- 
posed of  priests  (jwrhaps  beads  of  the  twenty-four  classes,  not  deposed  high- 
priests),  the  second  of  expounders  and  transcribers  of  the  law  (see  Lightfoot, 
Jlor.  Htbr.  in  Matt.  ii.  4),  the  third  of  the  heads  of  the  principal  families  of 
Israel,  see  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  8,  p.  15  sq. 

-'  In  the  question  proposed  by  the  deputation,  'Ej/  iro'ia  i£ovo~ia  ravra.  Troiels 
(Mark  xi.  2*).  the  ravra  appears  to  refer,  not  to  the  present  or  previous  teaching 
of  our  Lord  (Bengel,  comp.  Chrysost.),  but  to  the  authoritative  purging  of  the 
temple  the  day  before  (Cyril.  Alex.,  Euthym.),  and  apparently  also  to  the  mira- 
cles on  the  blind  and  the  lame,  of  which  some  of  the  speakers  had  been  wit- 
nesses. See  Matt.  xxi.  15.  The  probable  design  was  to  induce  our  Lord  to  lay 
such  claim  to  divine  powers  as  might  Le  turned  into  a  charge  agaiust  Him. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  273 

tell,"  the  consequent  refusal  of  our  Lord  to  give  them  an 
answer,1  and   vet  the   mercy  with  which,  by 

,.  ,   ,  ,       .  i         ^     i       xi      •  Per.  28-32,  33— 

means  of  two  parables, their  conduct,  both  in      ^ 

its    individual   and  in   its  official   aspects,  is 

placed  clearly  before  them,-  with  all  its  issues  of  shame 

and  condemnation. 

The  drift  of  the  two  parables,  especially  of  the  second, 
they  failed    not   clearly  to   perceive.     They 
knew  that   our  Lord  was   speaking  with  ref-     on  the  part  <&  the 
erence  to  them,  but  they  hoed  not,  nay,  they    rfe""t"""<- 

.  .  T  T .  .    ,  Mark  jrii.  12. 

renew  their  efforts  against  I  Inn  with  greater 

~  °  Matt.  xxvi.  4G. 

implacability,  and  are  only  restrained  from 

open  acts  by  their  fear  of  the  populace.      With  words  of 

last  and  merciful  warning,3  as  expressed  in  the  parable  of 


1  The  question  proposed  by  our  Lord  had  close  reference  to  Himself,  as  Him  of 
whom  John  had  spoken, and  that  too  to  a  similar  deputation  (John  i.  10  sq.)  to 
the  present.  The  SanJiedrin  had  heard  two  years  ago,  from  the  mouth  of  t  lie 
Baptist,  an  indirect  answer  to  the  very  question  they  were  now  proposing;  meet, 
then,  was  it  that  they  should  first  declare  the  estimation  in  which  they  held  him 
who  had  so  spoken  to  them. 

2  in  the  first  of  the  two  parables,  the  Two  Sons  sent  into  the  Vineyard,  the  gen- 
eral course  of  conduct  of  the  Pharisaical  party  is  put  in  contrast  with  that  of 
the  publicans  and  harlots  (ver.  31),  and  thus  more  clearly  shown  in  its  true  char- 
acter. By  their  general  habits  this  latter  class  practically  said  ob  &e\oo  to  the 
di\  Ine  command,  but  afterwards  repented,  at  the  preaching  of  John.  The  Phar- 
isaical party,  on  the  contrary,  at  once  said  4yw  Kvpte  with  all  affected  readiness, 
but,  as  their  conduct  to  this  very  hour  showed  clearly  enough,  never  even 
attempted  to  fulfil  the  promise;  they  were  the  second  son  of  the  parable,  the 
harlots  and  publicans  (not  the  Gentiles,  as  Chrysost.  and  the  principal  patristic 
expositors]  the  first.  Compare  Lange,  Leben  Jeau,  n.  G.  G,  Part  n.  p.  1215,  G res- 
well,  Dissert,  zl.  Vol.  Hi.  p.  113,  and  see  De  Wette  and  Meyer  in  loe.  In  the 
second  parable,  tbe  Husbandmen  who  slew  the  Heir,  the  conduct  of  the  Phar- 
isaical party,  a~  BrJer  (l>i.<e.  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1<>7)  rightly  observes,  is  set 
forth  more  in  reference  to  its  official  characteristics,  and  to  the  position  of  the 
rejecting  party  as  representatives  of  the  nation.  At  the  same  time,  also,  the 
punishment  thai  awaited  them  {liriiyaye  koX  tcls  KoAaacis,  Chrys.),  which  was 
only  hinted  at  in  the  first  parable  (Matt.  xxi.  21),  is  now  expressly  declared. 
Bee  Matt.  x\i.  41.  On  these  parables  generally,  see  Stier,  I.  c,  Trench,  Xotes  on 
the  Parabli  S,  p.  L60  sq.,  173  s<|.,  and  com]).  Greswell,  /'arables,  Vol.  v.  p.  1  sq. 

8 There  seems  m>  jusl  reason  for  thinking,  with  Olshansen  and  others,  that 
Matt.  xxi.  46,  W  conclude  the  previous  scene.  The  words  only  depict  thi 
era!  state  of  (feeling  of  the  adverse  party,  viz.,  that  they  both  perceived  (he 
application  of  the  parable,  and  were  only  restrained  from  open  violence  by  U:>r 
of  the  multitude,  and  thus  in  fact  prepare. the  reader  tor  the  further  act  of 
mcroy  on  the  part  of  our  Lord  in  addressing  yet  another  parable  to  these  malig- 


274  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

the  Marriage  of  the  King's  Son,  they  depart  for  a  season 
to   organize   some   plan    how  they  may  en- 

Ck.   XXU.    1   Sq,  .  TT        1  /"v  •  XT'  11  1 

snare  the  Holy  One  in  His  speech;  how  they 
Matt. xxn. is.      may  force  Him  or  beo-uile  Him  into  admis- 

ilark  xti.  13.  J  ~ 

sions  which  may  afford  a  colorable  pretext  for 
giving  Him  up  to  the  stern  man1  that  then  bore  the 
sword  in  Jerusalem. 

They  choose  fit  instruments  for  such  an  attempt,  —  their 
own    disciples,  associated    with    Herodians ; 

The     question  .  .  .  .     .     a    ,       .  .        , 

about  the  >httu  of     men  at  variance  in  many  points,-  but  united 

Pco^ar.  *        '"     m  onei  an(l  ready  enough  now,  as  they  had 

jfaw.aas.i6.      been  once  before,  to  combine  in  any  attempt 

Mark  lit.  C.  J  I 

to  compass  the  destruction  of  one  who  was 
alike  hateful  to  both.  'Twas  a  well-arranged  combination  : 
religious  hypocrisy  and  political  craft,  hierarchical  preju- 
dice and  royalist  sympathies ;  each  party  scarcely  tolerat- 
ing the  other  except  for  temporary  and  special  purposes, 
and  yet  both  of  them,  for  the  time  and  the  occasion,  working 
harmoniously  together,3  and  concurring  in  the  proposal  of 
the  most  perplexing  and   dangerous  question  that  could 


nant  enemies.    Comp.  Chrysost.  in  Matt.  Horn.  lxix.  hut.,  Lange,  Leben  Jesn, 
ii.  6.  6,  Part  II.  p.  1217. 

1  Such  certainly  seems  to  have  been  the  general  character  of  Pilate  as  procu- 
rator of  Judaea.  See  Luke  xiii.  1,  and  compare  Joseph.  Antiq.  xvm.  3.  1  sq., 
Met/.  Jud.  ii.  9.  2  sq.  There  are  some  proofs  that  this  sternness  was  not  always 
pushed  to  an  extreme  (see  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  34,  p.  122,  note),  but  it  is  still 
equally  clear  that  his  general  conduct  towards  the  refractory  province  of  which 
he  was  procurator  was  by  no  means  marked  by  leniency  or  forbearance.  The 
consideration  of  his  conduct  as  a  public  officer  forms  the  subject  of  a  separate 
treatise  by  J.  C.  S.  Gerniar,  Thorun.  1785.  See  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Pilatus," 
Vol.  ii.  p.  262. 

2  On  the  general  characteristics  of  the  political  sect  of  the  Herodians,  see  Lect. 
iv.  p.  108,  note  3. 

S  The  temporary  bond  of  union  between  the  two  parties  was  now  probably  a 
common  fear  caused  by  the  attitude  which  they  conceived  our  Lord  to  have 
recently  assumed.  The  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem,  and  the  authoritative 
acts  in  the  temple,  would  have  been  easily  represented  by  the  Pharisees,  though 
happening  in  Judsea,  as  boding  danger  to  the  authority  of  Herod  when  the 
Prophet  should  return  back  to  his  home  in  Galilee.  To  regard  the  Herodians  as 
"  soldiers  of  Herod  "  (Chrysost.),  and  sent  only  as  witnesses  (u  ti  Kara  rov  Kai- 
crapos  a.TTOKpiH>e'n],  Euthym.),  does  not  seem  either  natural  or  accordant  with  the 
expressions  of  the  sacred  narrative,  which  seem  rather  to  imply  that  Loth  parties 
joined  in  the  question.     Sec  Mark  xii.  14. 


Li:ct.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  270 

then  have  been  devised  —  the  tributary  relations  of  a 
conquered  to  a  conquering  people.  Let  us  pause  for  a 
moment  to  consider  the  exact  nature  of  the  attempt,  and 
the  true  difficulties  of  the  question  proposed.  ...  A  party 
of  men,  with  every  appearance,  as  the  third 
Evangelist  implies,  of  being  right-minded 
and  thoroughly  in  earnest,  come,  as  it  would  seem,  with  a 
case  of  conscience,1  "Was  it  meet  and  right  to  give  tribute 
to  Caesar,  or  no?"  To  such  a  question,  even  if  proposed  by 
honest  men,  hard  would  it  have  been  to  have  returned  a 
blameless  answer  at  such  a  time  and  in  such  a  place, — 
during  the  tumultuous  passover  season,  and  in  the  very 
presence  of  the  symbols  of  these  conflicting  claims ;  when 
round  the  speakers  spread  the  temple  courts  and  the 
thronging  worshippers  of  the  God  of  Israel ;  when  yonder 
stood  the  palace  of  the  first  Herod,  and  in  front  rose  the 
frowning  tower  of  Antonia.2  Hard  indeed  would  it  have 
been,  in  such  a  case,  to  have  answered  honest  men  without 
causing  offence;  but  plainly,  as  it  would  have  seemed,  im- 
possible, when  those  who  put  the  question  were  avowed  hyp- 
ocrites, of  differing  religious  sympathies  and  of  discordant 
political  creeds.  If  the  Lord  answered  as  they  might  have 
hoped  and  expected,''  standing  as  now  He  did  in  the  very 

1  The  question,  it  will  be  observed,  was  so  worded  :is  to  show  that  it  affected 
to  be  considered  as  something  more  than  one  of  mere  political  duty  or  expedi- 
ency. The  inquiry  was  not  whether  it  was  advisable  to  give  tribute  to  Caesar, 
but  whether  it  was  laiqftd  to  do  so  (i^tcniu  Sovvai,  Matt.  nxu.  17,  Mark  \ii.  14, 
Luke  xx.  22);  whether  it  was  consistent  with  an  acknowledgment  of  <•"<!  as 
their  kin;:.  The  seditious  enterprise  of  Judas  <>f  Gamala  (Acts  v.  37)  i  ut  this 
forward  as  one  of  the  principles  which  it  pretended  to  vindicate,  /xdvov  iryeix6va 
Ka\  ZiaTr6ri)v  rbv  Qebu  that,  Joseph.  Antiq.  .win.  l.  6.  Compare  Lightfoot, 
Hot.  II.hr.  in  Matt,  \.\ii.  20,  Sepp,  Leben  Ctoristi,  vi.  17,  Vol.  iii.  p.  256. 

-This  fortress  was  rebuilt  by  the  first  Herod  towards  the  beginning  of  his 
(Joseph.  Antiq.  .win.  4.  3),  and  was  situated  at  the  N.  W.  corner  of  the 
temple  enclosure,  with  which  it  was  connected  by  an  underground  gallery 
(Joseph.  Antiq.  xv.  il.J7).  Its  situation,  and  the  full  view  it  commanded  of  the 
outer  courts,  made  it  a  com  cuicnt  place  for  the  Roman  garrison,  by  which,  when 
Judaea  came  under  the  jurisdiction  of  a  procurator,  it  was  regularly  occupied. 
Bee  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  " Tempel,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  686;  compare  Friedlieb,  trchaol. 
♦  28.  p.  98  sq. 

■'i  "They  expected,"  says  Chrysostom,  "that  they  should  catch  Him  whichever 
way  lie  might  answer;  they  hoped,  however,  that  He  would  answer  against 


276  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

centre  of  Judaism,  and  laying  claim  to  represent  all  that 
was  most  distinctive  in  its  expectations  —  if  He  answered 
Nay,  their  most  eager  wish  was  realized ;  they  could  at 
once,  with  a  fair  show  of  reason  and  justice,  deliver  Him 
up  to  the  Roman  government  as  an  advocate  of  sedition, 
a  Galihean  of  avowed  Galilaean  sympathies,  one  whose 
blood  they  knew  Pilate  would  now  as  readily  shed  at  the 
very  altar,  as  he  had  shed  that  of  His  coun- 

Luke  xiii.  1. 

trymen  but  a  short  time  before.1  Did  He, 
however,  contrary  to  expectation,  answer  Yea,  then  He 
stood  forth  to  the  multitude  as  the  practical  opponent  of 
the  theocratic  aspirations  they  so  dearly  cherished,  and  to 
the  Herodians  as  the  Jewish  subject  of  a  Jewish  prince, 
who  scrupled  not  to  sanction  the  payment  of  tribute  to 
heathens  and  to  strangers. 

Such  was  the  most  artful  and  complex  stratagem  ever 
laid  against  the  Saviour;2  and  yet,  with  what  divine  sim- 
plicity was  it  frustrated !     A  word  lays  bare  the  true  char- 

tbe  Herodians."  —  In  Matt.  Horn.  lxx.  Compare  Euthym.  in  loc.  This  also,  aa 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  observes,  seems  clearly  to  transpire  from  the  words  of  St. 
Luke  (iW  iiriKafiwvTai  avrov  Aoyov,  oxrre  vapaSovvai  aiiToi'  rfj  apxfj  ical  7y 
££ouo-iq  tov  i]ye/j.6vos,  ch.  xx.  20),  and  probably  suggested  the  insidious  com- 
ment (ou  /3AeVeis  eis  irpoacairov  avSrpdnruiv,  Matt.  xxii.  16,  Mark  xii.  14;  comp. 
Luke  xx.  21)  with  which  they  accosted  our  Lord.  ''This,  too,  they  say,  inciting 
Him  not  to  entertain  any  reverence  for  Cajsar,  and  not  from  any  fear  to  with- 
hold an  answer  to  the  inquiry." —  Euthymius  on  Matt.  xxii.  16. 

1  The  exact  time  and  circumstances  under  which  the  act  here  alluded  to  took 
place  is  not  known.  The  way  in  which  it  was  told  to  our  Lord  (irapyo-av  84 
rives  iv  avrw  t&3  KatptS  airayyeAAovres,  Luke  xiii.  1)  would  seem  to  imply  that 
it  had  happened  recently,  and  the  mention  of  the  country  to  which  the  victims 
belonged  would  also  seem  to  render  it  likely  that  it  was  one  of  those  movements 
in  which  the  Galilasans  were  so  often  implicated.  Compare  Joseph.  Vit.  §  17, 
and  Antiq.  xvn.  9.  3.  That  they  were  actual  adherents  of  the  party  which 
Judas  of  Gamala  had  formerly  headed  (Theophyl.)  is  possible,  but  not  very 
probable.    See  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Luc.  xiii.  1. 

2  It  is  not  without  point  that  Cyril  of  Alexandria  alludes  to  the  way  in  which 
they  who  strove  to  involve  the  innocent  Saviour  with  the  Roman  government 
themselves  became  involved  with  that  nation  in  the  most  tragic  way.  After 
quoting  Psalm  xxxv.  7,  and  showing  its  application  in  the  present  case,  he  adds: 
"  For  so  verily  they  did  fall ;  for  because  they  delivered  Jesus  unto  Pilate,  they 
were  themselves  given  over  to  destruction ;  and  the  Itoraan  host  consumed  them 
with  Are  and  sword,  and  burnt  up  all  their  land,  and  even  the  glorious  temple 
that  was  among  them."  —  Commentary  on  Luke,  Sermon  exxxv.  Part  II.  p.  633 
(Trausl.). 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  277 

acter  of  the  affected  case  of  conscience  and  of  those  who 
proposed  it;1  a  single  command  that  the  r,lomre  an,t 
tribute-money  be  brought,  and  a  single  in-    frustration  of  «/<« 

»  °  °  etratagem. 

quiry  whose  image  it  bore, — and  the  whole 

,  „  .  ,    ,  ..  .  Mark  xtt.  1.5. 

web  of  cunning  and  hypocrisy  is  rent  in  a       xatt.xxu.sa. 
moment :  "  All  that  by  God's  appointment 
belongs  unto  Ca?sar  must  be  rendered  unto  Caesar,  and  all 
that  be  God's  unto  God,  and  to  Ilira  alone."2     On  receiv- 
ing such  an  answer,  no  marvel  is  it  that  we 
lead  that  the  very  inquirers  tendered  to  Him       ibm.xxu.ss. 
the  reluctant  homage  of  their  wonder,3  that       ukexx.  26. 
they  were  silent  and  went  their  way. 


1  It  is  very  distinctly  specified  by  all  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists  that  our 
Lord  saw  into  the  hearts  and  characters  of  those  who  came  with  the  question. 
Camp.  Matt,  xxii.18,  yvovs  5e  6  'Ivaovs  rrjf  irovripiav  ;  Mark  xii.15,  tlows  avraiv 
t))i>  virSicpiffiy  ;  Luke  xx.  23,  Karav operas  Se  avrwv  rr]i>  iravovpyiav.  We  are 
told  by  St.  Luke  that  they  were  iyKa&trovs  vnoKptvo/xiuovs  iavrovs  SiKaiovs 
elvai  (ch.  xx.  20);  this  our  Lord  confirms  and  exposes  by  His  address  as  recorded 
bj  St.  Matthew  [(lie  reading  in  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  is  doubtful],  Tt  ^te  Treipo- 
£ere  vir  o  k  p  it  al,  ch.  xxii.  18. 

2  The  exact  force  of  this  declaration  has  been  somewhat  differently  estimated, 
in  consequence  of  the  different  meanings  that  have  been  assigned  to  la.  tou 
@tov.  Most  of  them,  however,  e.  t/.,  "the  temple  tribute"  (Miliuun,  Hist.  0/ 
Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p.  313),  "  the  inner  life"  (Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Tart  11. 1220; 
comp.  Tertull.  contr.  Marc.  iv.  38),  etc.,  seem  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  gen- 
eral form  of  the  expression,  and  give  a  mere  special  and  partial  aspect  to  what 
was  designedly  inclusive  and  comprehensive.  If,  with  Chrysostoin  (in  Matt. 
Horn.  lxx.  Vol.  vii.  p.  776),  we  explain  the  expression  as  simply  and  generally, 
to.  red  &(w  nap'  i}fxwv  bcpstAu/xeva,  the  meaning  of  the  whole  appears  perfectly 
clear:  "(jive  to  C';esar  what  rightly  belongs  to  him  [ov  yap  sVti  tqvto  Soi/vat, 
&AA.'  airoSovvai,  Chrys.),  as  to  one  ordained  of  God  (Bom.  xiii.  1),  and  to  God 
ail  that  be  His  —  all  that  is  due  to  Him  as  your  King  and  your  God."  Thus,  then, 
far  from  separating  what  is  political  from  what  is  religious,  or  accepting  the  ques- 
tion in  the  alternative  form  (SoCvai  7)  otf,  i.  e.,  in  point  of  fact, "  <  tesar  or  God  "?) 
in  which  it  was  proposed,  our  Lord  graciously  returns  an  answer  which  shows 
that  it  was  not  a  question  for  either  yea  or  nay;  that  obedience  to  Ca:sar  and 
duty  tn  God  were  DOt  things  to  be  put  in  competition  with  each  other,  but  to  be 
Dnited,  —  the  latter  suppl]  ing,  where  necessary,  the  true  regulating  and  limiting 
principle  of  the  former  (see  Chrys  in  loc),  and  the  former,  thus  regulated  and 
defined,  becoming  a  very  part  of  the  latter,  — duty  to  Him  by  whom  Caisar  was 
<  a  -ar,  and  from  whom  are  "the  powers  that  be."  Tor  sound  practical  applica- 
tions of  this  text  see  Andrewes,  Serin,  vi.  Vol.  v.  p.  127  (A.-C.  Libr.),  and  a  ser- 
mon liv  Hill,   1'nir.  Sinn.  I.  p.  1  sq. 

8  This,  not  improbably,  would  have  been  increased  by  the  recognition  of  the 
determination  of  their  own  schools  (" Ubicunqne  namisms  regis  alionjns  obtinet, 
illic  IncolsB  regem  latum  pro  domino  agnoscuut."  —  Maimon.  in  "  Gczclah,"  cap. 

24 


278  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

But  if  a  question   as  to  civil  duties  and  relations  has 

been  thus  answered  and    thus  foiled,  might 

of  tFe"1  saMt!cee3     not  a  question  as  to  religious  differences  prove 

touching  the  jtes-     more  successful  ?     Was  there  not  some  hope 

urrection.  ± 

in  stirring  a  controversy  that  had  long  sepa- 
rated two  important  sects?  Might  not  the  Sadducee 
succeed  where  the  Pharisee  and  Herodian  had  failed? 
The  trial  we  know  was  made.  On  that  same 
day,  as  St.  Matthew  particularly  specifies, 
a  party  of  the  Sadducees,1  probably  acting  under  the 
instructions  of  the  same  supreme  court,  approach  our 
Lord  with  a  hypothetical  case  of  religious  difficulty,  the 
woman  that  had  seven  husbands  in  this  world  —  to  whom 
was  she  to  belong  in  that  Avorld  to  come  in  which  those 
worldly  and  self-sufficient  speakers  so  utterly  disbe- 
lieved?2 The  question  was  coarsely  devised  and  coarsely 
propounded ;  but  the  attempt  to  drive  our  Lord  into  some 
admissions  that  might  compromise  Him  either  with  the 
Pharisees  or  with  the  multitude  was  rendered  thereby  all 
the  more  hopeful.  To  such  a  question  our  Lord  vouchsafes 
to  return  no   answer;  but  to  the   evil  heart  of  unbelief 

5),  which  the  Lord  was  in  part  here  actually  propounding  to  them.    See  Light- 
foot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Matt.  xxii.  20. 

1  These  Sadducees  might  have  been,  and  perhaps  actually  were,  a  portion  of  the 
Sanhedrin,  the  religious  opinions  of  the  sect  being  no  bar  to  their  election  as 
members  of  the  supreme  court.  See  Acts  xxiii.  C,  and  comp.  Friedlieb,  Arch'dol. 
§  8,  p.  19.  There  seems  no  reason  for  supposing,  with  Lightfoot  [in  Matt.  xxii. 
23),  that  there  was  any  connection  in  point  of  religious  creed  between  the  pres- 
ent party  and  the  Herodians  who  had  just  gone  away.  Some  of  the  Herodians 
might  possibly  have  been  Sadducees;  but  to  draw  definitely  such  a  conclusion 
from  Matt.  xvi.  6,  compared  with  Mark  viii.  15,  seems  certainly  precarious,  espe- 
cially when  we  remember  that  Herod  can  hardly  be  conceived  himself  to  have 
had  much  in  common  with  the  peculiar  tenets  of  the  Sadducees.  See  Matt. 
xiv.  2. 

2  See  Lightfoot,  Hoi:  Hebr.  in  Matt.  xii.  32.  The  statement  of  the  Sadducee 
was,  "  Deficit  nubes,  atque  abit;  sic  descendens  in  sepulc'nrum  non  redit."'  — 
Tanchum,  fol.  3.  1,  cited  by  Lightfoot  on  Matt.  xxii.  23.  They  appeared  to  have 
believed  that  the  soul  perished  with  the  body  (laSSuKalots  ras  >pvxas  d  \6yos 
avvutyavi^i  to7s  o-di/aaai,  Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  1.  4),  and  thus,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  denied  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection,  and  of  future  rewards  and  pun- 
ishments. Compare  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  II.  8.  14.  On  the  origin  and  peculiarities 
of  this  sect,  see  Lightfoot,  in  Matt.  iii.  7,  Jost,  Gesch.  dex  Judenth  n.  2.  8,  Vol. 
i.  p  215,  and  a  good  article  by  Winer,  R  WB.  Vol.  ii.  p.  352. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  279 

from  which  it   came  He  speaks  out  clearly  and   plainly. 
With  all  their  affected  wisdom  and  philosophic  calm  He 
tells  them  they  do  err,  and   that  they  know 
not  either  the  Scriptures,  which  clearly  teach       j^^if" 
the  doctrine  of  the  future  state  that  they  so 
confidently  denied,  or  the  power  of  God,  which  shall  make 
man  the  equal  of  angels  and  the  inheritor  of  incorruption.1 
So  clear  was  the  vindication  of  God's  truth,  so  weighty 
the   censure,  so  final   the    answer,  that  we  can    scarcely 
wonder  that  the  impressible  multitudes  were 

1  Matt.xxii.88. 

stricken  with  amazement,  and  that  some  even 

of  the  number  of  our  Lord's  opponents  could  not  forbear 

declaring  that  He  had  "  well  spoken,"  that 

°  /.  iirf.-exr.89. 

the    discomfiture    of  the    impugners    of  the 
future  state  was  complete  and  overwhelming.2 

One  at  least  of  that  number  was  so  struck  by  the  divine 

1  Our  Lord  does  not  notice  the  mefe  question  of  the  Sadducees,  but  the  erro- 
neous belief  thai  BUggested  it  (ob  irpb-i  ret  prifxara  a\\a  Ttpus  T^V  yvcbfxrjv  lirrd- 
ixtvos,  Chrysost.);  t his  Be  Bhowswas  due  to  their  ignorance  of  two  things:  (1) 
tlic  Scriptures,  (2)  the  power  of  Clod.  Their  ignorance  of  the  latter  is  shown 
first  (Matt.  xxii.  30,  .Mark  xii.  20,  Luke  xx.  G5,  30)  by  a  declaration  of  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  life  after  death,  and  the  change  of  the  natural  body  into  a 
spiritual  body  (1  Cor.  xv.  44;  comp.  Phil.  hi.  21);  the  ignorance  of  the  former 
by  a  declaration  of  the  doctrine  really  contained  in  the  Scriptures,  and  more 
especially  in  one  of  the  books  (Exod.  iii.  6)  of  that  very  portion  (the  Pentateuch) 
thai  contained  the  passage  on  which  they  had  based  their  question:  ineiBiiirep 
(K(7foi  rbf  Maiucrea  Trpoe0d\ouTO  Aotirbi/  Kal  avrbs  curb  rfjs  MaxratKris  ypa<pr]s 
tovtovs  iTTiOTop.i£ti.  Kut I iv luitis,  in  Matt.  xxii.  31,  closely  following  Chrysost. 
in  toe,  Vol.  vii.  p.  77S  (ed.  ISened.). 

'-'  It  has  been  commonly  alleged,  both  by  ancient  (Origen,  contr.  Ce/s.i.49, 
i  xpressly;  compare  also  Tertull.  Prater.  Hear.  cap.  45)  and  modern  writers, 
thai  the  Sadducees  only  acknowledged  the  authority  of  the  Pentateuch,  and 
that,  in  consequence,  our  Lord  specially  appealed  to  that  portion  of  Scripture. 
This,  however,  is  now,  as  it  would  seem,  rightly  called  in  question,  there  being 
no  continuation  of  such  an  opinion  in  the  notices  of  the  sect  supplied  by  Jose- 
plms  (compare  Antiq.  xm.  10.  6,  xvm.  1.  4,  Bell.  Jud.  ir.  8),  and  a  reasonable 
probability  that  the  Sadducees  could  not  have  had  the  share  in  the  eivil  and 
religious  government  of  the  nation,  which  it  can  be  proved  they  had,  if  they 
openly  differed  from  the  rest  of  their  countrymen  on  a  point  of  such  funda- 
mental importance  as  the  canon  of  Soripture.  The  correct  statement  appears 
to  be,  thai  they  rejected  all  tradition,  and  received  only  the  written  law;  and 
thai  this  special  adherence  to  the  latter,  though  merely  in  contradistinction  to 
tlie  foi  met .  gai  e  rise  to  the  opinion  thai  this  n  as  the  only  part  of  Scripture  that 
the;  accepted  be  canonical.  8ee  esp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  sin.  10.  C,  and  Winer, 
i:\Vi;.  Art.  "Sadducicr,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  353. 


280  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

wisdom  of   our   Lord's   last    answer,  that   though,  as   it 

would  seem  from  the  narrative  of  St.  Mat- 

me  question  of    thew    ]ie   carae   forward  with    the   hope   of 

the    lawyer    about  '  L 

the  greatest  com-    retrieving  the  honor  of  the  sect  to  "which  we 

mandment.  ° 

ch.  xxu.  3s.  know  that  he  belonged,    the  partisan  seems 

to  have  been  merged  in  the  interested  in- 
quirer; party  spirit  seems  to  have  given  way  to  a  genuine 
desire  to  learn  from  the  wise  Teacher  His  opinion  on  one, 
perhaps,  of  the  questions  of  the  time,2  —  the  relative  great- 
ness and  precedence  of  the  leading  commandments  of 
the  law.  At  the  same  time  the  question  was  one  that 
would  not  be  disapproved  of  by  the  adherents  of  the  party 
to  which  the  inquirer  belonged,  as  involving  probably  more 
than  one  answer  which  might  seriously  compromise  our 
Lord  with  some  of  the  Rabbinical  schools  of  the  day.3    In 


1  According  to  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxii.  3!Lsq.)  the  lawyer  forms  one  of  a  party 
of  Pharisees  who  were  collected  together  after  the  defeat  of  the  Sadducees,  and 
comes  forward  with  a  trying  and  probably  insidious  question  (Tfeipd^oov  ai>T(#)-} 
according  to  St.  Mark  (ch.  xii.  28  sq.),  he  puts  the  question  after  observing  how 
well  our  Lord  had  answered.  The  slight  apparent  difference  between  these 
accounts  admits  of  this  natural  explanation,  that  the  man  was  put  forward  by 
his  party  for  the  purpose  of  ensnaring  our  Lord,  and  that  he  acquiesced,  but 
that  he  was  also  really  inspired  by  a  sincere  desire  to  hear  the  opinion  of  one 
whose  wisdom  he  respected.  St.  Matthew  exhibits  him  in  the  former  light,  and 
in  reference  to  his  party  ;  St.  Mark  in  the  latter,  and  as  an  individual.  Compare 
Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  6.  6,  Part  n.  p.  1232.  The  reconciliation  adopted  by 
Euthymius  (see  Chrysostom),  that  the  designs  of  the  man  at  first  were  bad,  but 
were  changed  by  our  Lord's  answer,  seems  scarcely  so  natural. 

2  Somewhat  similar  questions  are  noticed  by  Schoettgen,  in  Matt.  xxii.  36,  and 
by  Wetstein  in  his  notes  on  ch.  v.  19  and  xxiii.  23.  According  to  Lightfoot  (in 
Marc.  xii.  28),  the  inquiry  turned  upon  the  importance  of  the  ceremonial  as 
compared  with  the  moral  law;  this,  however,  seems  less  probable. 

3  It  is  not  easy  to  specify  in  what  particular  way  the  question  was  calculated 
to  ensnare  our  Lord;  though,  from  the  nature  of  the  controversies  and  casuistry 
of  the  day.  it  is  not  difficult  to  imagine  that  there  were  known  differences  of 
opinion  on  the  subject,  in  which  it  might  have  been  thought  our  Lord  could  not 
escape  becoming  involved.  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that,  on  an  earlier  occasion, 
when  our  Lord  puts  an  inquiry  to  a  lawyer  who  had  a  similar  but  stronger 
design  against  Him  (avtcm)  i  kit  e  i  p  d(o>v  ahr6v,  Luke  x.  25),  "What  is 
written  in  the  law?  "  (comp.  Matt.  xxii.  36,  iroia  ivroK^j  fx(ya\rj  eV  tw  v6ixa>), 
the  answer  was  promptly  given,  in  terms  but  little  different  to  the  present,  and 
was  approved  of  by  our  Lord  (Luke  x.  28).  The  present  question,  then,  might 
have  been  intended  to  lead  Him  to  give  the  prominence  to  some  single  com- 
mand; the  answer  given,  however,  was  one  which  our  Lord  had  commended  as 
an  answer  to  a  more  general  question,  aud  which  involved  the  substance  of  no 


Lkct.  VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  281 

the  inquirer's  concluding  comment,  his  better  feelings  still 
more  clearly  prevail ;  a  sort  of  consciousness  of  the  idle 
nature  of  all  that  casuistry  and  formality  of  which  his 
own  question  was  the  exponent  breaks  out  in  words,  and 
obtains  for  him,  from  the  Redeemer's  lips,  the  gracious 
declaration,1  that  "he  was  not  far  from  the 
kingdom  of  God. 

And   was  this   the   last   attempt  to   ensnare  our  Lord 
which  was  made  on  this  eventful  day?     So       _,  , 

*  Trie  question  rel- 

indeed  it  would  seem  from  the  tenor  of  the     aaeetothemnum 

,  />        i  •  •         t  •  taken  in  adultery. 

present  portion  of  the  inspired  narrative. 
But  are  we  not  in  some  degree  justified  in  again2  ad- 
vancing the  conjecture  that  the  incident  of  the  woman 
taken  in  adultery  belongs  to  the  history  of  the  present 
day?  Such  a  view,  it  may  be  remembered,  has  the 
support  of  some  slight  amount  of  external  evidence,  in 
addition  to  the  very  strong  internal  arguments  on  which 
it  principally  rests.3  What,  save  the  deeply-laid  stratagem 
of  the  tribute-money,  could  have  seemed  more  hopeful 
than  the  proposal  of  a  case  for  decision  which  must  appar- 
ently have   involved   our   Lord   either  with   the   Roman 


single  command,  but  of  all.  The  opinion  of  Chrysostom  and  others,  that  it  was 
to  tempt  our  Lord  to  say  something  about  his  own  Godhead,  La  apparently  not 
\  ery  probable. 

1  We  cannot  say,  with  Milman,  that  the  lawyer  "  did  not  hesitate  openly  to 
espouse  our  Lord's  doctrines,"  and  that  the  Pharisees  "  were  paralyzed  by  this 
desertion  "  [Hist,  qf  Christianity ,  Vol.  i.  p.  ;;i"i),  as  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bacred 
text  to  substantiate  such  an  Lnferenoe.  The  declaration  that  "he  was  not  far 
from  the  kingdom  of  God  "  gives  hope  that  be  was  afterwards  admitted  into  it ; 
but,  as  Chrysostom  correctly  observes,  Heliannruf  en  iTzexovra-  ''*'a  Cr\'r'h'xV  T^ 
Xtiirov.  —  In  Matt.  Horn,  i.xxi. 

-  See  above,  Lect.  vi.  p.  232. 

3  The  external  evidence  is  specified  above,  p.  232,  note  2.  The  internal  argu- 
ments me.  on  the  negative  Bide,  (a)  the  striking  dissimilarity  of  the  lanj  u 
from  that  of  St.  John,  especially  in  the  particles,  (b)  the  forced  nature  of  the 
connection  with  the  close  of  John  vii.  (see  Luthardt,  Joftann.  Evang.  Pari  n.  p. 
39),  and  (c)  the  total  want  of  union  with  what  follows;  and  on  the  positive  side, 
(</)  the  similarity  in  language  to  that  of  the  Synoptical  Gospels  (compare  Meyer 
mi  John  viii.  1—3),  especially  of  St.  Luke,  and,  lastly,  [e)  the  striking  similarity 
n  the  attempt  und  those  recorded  as  having  been  made  on  the  day  we  are 
now  considering.  Compare  Lange,  /.'//•/<  Jem,  n.  0.  8,  Part  u.  p.  1222,  and  the 
Introductory  critical  comments  of  Meyer,  Kommentar,  p.  247  sq.  Ced.  8). 
24* 


282  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

governor  or  the  Sanhedrin?  Did  He  decide,  as  they  seem 
to  have  hoped,  in  favor  of  carrying  out  the  Mosaic  law,1 
then  He  was  at  once  committed  to  antagonism  not  only 
with  Roman  customs,  but  with  the  exclusive  power  which 
Rome  seems  to  have  reserved  to  herself  in  all  capital 
cases.2  Did  He  decide  in  favor  of  mercy  to  the  sinner, 
then  He  stood  forth,  both  before  the  Sanhedrin  and  the 
populace,  as  a  daring  innovator,  that  publicly  sanctioned 
the  abrogation  of  a  decree  of  the  Mosaic  law.  But,  as  in 
all  the  preceding  cases,  the  same  heavenly  wisdom  displays 
itself  in  the  answer  that  was  vouchsafed.  The  law  of 
Moses  was  tacitly  maintained,  but  its  execution  limited 
to  those  who  were  free  from  all  such  sins  of  uncleanness3 

1  Some  little  difficulty  has  been  felt  in  the  mention  of  "  stoning"  (ver.  4),  as 
the  general  punishment  of  death  was  decreed  against  those  convicted  of  adul- 
tery (Lev.  xx.  20,  Deut.  xxii.  22),  the  special  punishment  of  stoning  being  appar- 
ently reserved  for  the  case  of  unfaithfulness  in  one  betrothed  (Deut.  xxii.  23,  24). 
It  is  not  improbable  that  the  woman  in  the  present  case  might  have  been  one  of 
the  latter  class  (Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Joann.  v.  5),  especially  as  the  Rabbin- 
ical law  seems  to  have  specified  that  the  adulteress  was  to  be  strangled  (see 
Lightfoot,  in  loc.)\  still,  as  this  last  point  does  not  appear  certain  (see  Ewald, 
Alterth.  pp.  218,  232,  and  comp.  Michael.  Mos.  liecht.  §  2G2),  and  as  "  stoning"  is 
mentioned  in  the  Law,  and  in  close  connection  with  adultery,  it  is  perhaps  more 
probable  that  such  was  generally  regarded  as  the  prescribed  mode  of  death,  and 
that  this  was  a  case  of  /xoLXcia  in  the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the  word. 

2  This  question  has  been  much  debated.  The  most  reasonable  view  appears  to 
be,  that  though,  in  hurried  cases  like  that  of  St.  Stephen's  martyrdom,  the  pun- 
ishment of  death  might  have  been  tumultuously  inflicted,  still  that  the  declara- 
tion of  the  party  of  the  Sanhedrin,  that  "  it  was  not  lawful  for  them  to  put  any 
one  to  death"  (John  xviii.  31),  was  strictly  true,  and  that  the  supreme  court  lost 
the  power  of  formally  carrying  out  their  sentence,  even  in  religious  cases,  prob- 
ably about  the  time  that  Judaa  became  attached  to  Syria,  and  placed  under  a 
Roman  procurator.  See  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  28,  p.  96  sq.,  and  Winer,  It  WB. 
Art.  "Synedr."  Vol.  ii.  p.  553.  The  statements  of  the  Talmudical  writers,  that 
the  loss  of  this  power  was  really  owing  to  the  Sanhedrin  ceasing  to  sit  in  the 
room  or  hall  called  "  Gazith"  (see  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Joann.  xviii.  31,  and 
compare  Selden,  de  Synedr.  n.  15),  is  now  justly  considered  an  evasion  to  cover 
the  true  state  of  the  case,  viz.,  that  they  had  been  deprived  of  it  by  the  Romans. 
See  Friedlieb,  §  10,  p.  22  sq. 

3  The  context  and  circumstances  of  the  case  seem  to  suggest  that  the  term 
ava/xapr-nros  (an  ct7ra|  \ty6,u.  in  the  N.  T.)  is  not  here  to  be  understood  in  refer- 
ence to  sin  generally  (Luthardt,  Johann.  Evang.  Part  II.  p.  9G),  but  in  reference 
to  the  class  of  sins  of  which  the  case  in  question  was  an  instance,  i.  e.,  sins  of  the 
flesh.  Compare  pvnKiri  ap-aprave,  ver.  11,  and  the  limited  meaning  of  aixaproi- 
\6s,  Luke  vii.  37.  It  may  be  remarked  that,  according  to  the  text  of  the  Codex 
Beza,  the  woman  is  actually  described  as  eVl  a  jj.  a  p  r  i  ot  yvvalica  el\-r]np.tvr)v 
(ver.  3). 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  283 

as  those  of  the  guilty  woman  who  stood  before  them.  Xo 
wonder  is  it  that  we  read  that  they  went  out  one  by  one, 
convicted  hy  their  consciences,  and  left  the 
sinner  standing  in  the  midst,  in  the  solitary 
presence  of  her  sinless  yet  merciful  Judge.  If  this  be  the 
true  position  of  the  narrative,  our  blessed  Lord  would  now 
have  been  subjected  to  the  most  trying  questions  that  the 
subtlety  of  man  could  excogitate, — the  first  relative  to 
the  authority  of  His  public  acts,  the  second  of  a  political 
nature,  the  third  relating  to  doctrine,  the  fourth  to  specu- 
lative teaching,  the  last-mentioned  to  discipline.1 

And  now  all  those  malicious  attempts  had  been  openly 
and    triumphantly    frustrated ;    so   triumph- 
antly, that  all  the   three    Synoptical   Evan-     HmTrapectina  <T« 
gelists   tell  us  that  no  man  henceforth  had     ajj£t3fti 
the  hardihood  to  propose  any  further  ques-       fSx^n 
tion.      One    final    display   of  meek   victory 
alone  was  wanting,  and  that  must  be  seen  in  the  interro- 
gated now  assuming  the  character  of  the  interrogator,  and 
receiving   only  the   answer  of  shamed   silence.     The   last 
question  mentioned  in  the  narratives  of  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Mark  had  been  proposed  by  a  scribe,  and  to  them  and 
to  the  Pharisees  with  whom  he  was  united,2  and  to  whose 
sect  he  probably  belonged,  does  our  Lord  now  turn  with 
the  inquiry,  how,  when   according  to   the   teaching  of  the 

1  The  position  in  which  this  attempt  stands  with  reference  to  the  others  cannot 
of  course  be  determined.  The  cursive  manuscripts  (see  above,  p.  282,  note  3) 
w  liich  place  it  after  Luke  xxi.  3S  probably  only  intended  to  imply  that  the  i u <■  i- 
deut  was  judged  to  belong  to  the  portion  of  the  Gospel  which  immediately  pre- 
ceded, not  thai  it  formed  the  last  of  the  attempts  in  historical  order.  Of  mere 
conjectures,  the  most  probable  seems  that  which  places  it  after  the  question 
about  the  tribute-money.    Compare  Lange,  Leben  Jew*,  n.  6.  6,  Pari  n.  p.  1222. 

-  According  to  st.  Matthew  the  question  was  proposed  to  t lie  Pharisees  (oh. 
Xxii.  41);  according  to  St.  Luke,  who  omits  the  question  about  the  chief  com- 
mandment, to  [not concerning,  Grot.,  Alford  on  Ma//,  xxii.  41]  the  scribes  (ch. 
XX.  89)j  according  to  St.  Mark,  it  was  uttered  in  the  hearing  of  the  people  (ch. 
xii.  3C>,  37),  and  as  a  sort  of  answer  (ver.  35)  to  the  silence  of  the  opponents.  All 
these  accounts  admit  of  the  obvious  explanation,  that  the  question  of  our  Lord 
was  proposed  openly,  and  to  those  «  ho  had  la>t  questioned  ILm.  viz.,  Pharisees 
in  regard  to  their  Beet,  but  Several  Of  whom  were  scribes  and  lawyers  by  profes- 
sion.   Compare  Luke  xx.  89  with  Mark  xii.  28. 


284  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

scribes  Christ  is  the  Son  of  David,  David,  while  speaking 

under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit,  nevertheless  calls  Him 

Lord.     How  can  He  be  both  His  Lord  and 

Psalm  ex.  1.  .  in  n 

His  Son  r1  To  that  profound  question,  so 
clearly  pointing  to  the  mystery  of  the  divine  and  human 
natures  of  Him  who  stood  before  them,2  no  answer  is  even 

attempted.      By   silence    they    acknowledge 

Matt.  xxii.  46.  .      *  J      .  /  ° 

their  defeat ;  and  in  silence  they  now  receive 
that  warning  though  merciful  chastisement  of  their  meek 
victor  recorded  to  us  by  the  first  Evangelist,  which  forms 
the  subject  of  the  whole  of  the  23d  chapter  of  his  Gospel. 
There  our  Lord,  with  a  just  severity,  lays  bare  the  prac- 
tices of  scribe  and  Pharisee,  concluding  with 
ver.  is s7.  an  apostrophe  to  Jerusalem,  which  it  would 

Ver.  3/  sq.  1  l 

seem  had  been  uttered  on  an  earlier  occa- 
sion,3 but  was  now  appropriately  repeated,  as  declaring,  in 


1  It  lias  been  popularly  urged  by  modern  expositors  tbat  the  psalm  was  not 
written  by  David  but  to  David  (Ewald,  Meyer,  al.),  and  that  our  Lord  conformed 
His  language  to  the  generally  received  views  of  the  time  (De  Wette).  This  latter 
assumption,  though  a  very  favorite  one  in  our  popular  theology,  is  always  very 
precarious,  if  no  worse.  In  the  present  case  it  is  even  out  of  place,  as  there  are 
strong  reasons  for  believing,  from  a  fair  critical  consideration  of  the  psalm  in 
question,  that  it  was  written  by  David,  as  is  here  expressly  declared.  Compare 
Hengstenberg,  Comment,  on  Psalms,  Vol.  iii.  p.  310  sq.  (Clark),  Phillips,  ib.,  Vol. 
ii.  p.  416,  and  on  the  Messianic  character  of  the  psalm  and  its  reference  to  2  Sam. 
vii.  1  sq.,  1  Chron.  xvii.  1  sq.,  see  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch.  §  100,  p.  490. 

2  As  Euthymius  briefly  but  clearly  expresses  it, —  "  He  is  said  to  be  his  Son,  as 
having  sprung  from  his  root,  according  to  His  human  generation;  but  his  Lord, 
as  being  his  Cod."  —  In  Matt.  xxii.  45,  Vol.  i.  p.  869. 

3  An  address  scarcely  differing  from  the  present  except  in  the  particle  that 
connects  the  last  verse  with  what  precedes  {yap,  Matt,  xxiii.  39;  Se,  Luke  xiii. 
35)  is  specified  by  St.  Luke  as  having  been  uttered  by  our  Lord  after  receiving 
the  message  about  Herod's  designs  as  communicated  by  the  Pharisees.  See 
above,  Lect.  VI.  p.  242.  There  does  not  seem  any  reason  either  for  agreeing 
with  Meyer  {on  Luke  xiii.  34),  who  asserts  that  the  original  and  proper  position 
of  the  words  is  that  assigned  by  St.  Matthew,  or  with  Wieseler  {Chron.  SynojJS. 
p.  322;  compare  Credner,  Einleit.  p.  67,  136),  who  regards  the  words  in  their 
present  position  as  interpolated  from  St.  Luke.  As  we  have  elsewhere,  and  as 
it  would  seem  justly,  urged  the  probability  of  a  repetition  of  the  same  words  on 
different  occasions,  when  called  forth  by  something  similar,  so  in  the  present 
instance  does  it  seem  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  similarity  of  the  subject 
which  in  both  cases  precedes  the  words  (the  slaughter  of  the  righteous  in  Jeru- 
salem), called  forth  in  both  the  pathetic  address  to  the  bloodthirsty  and  now 
for'.orn  city.    Compare  Lect.  iv.  p.  170,  note  2,  p.  181,  note  1. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  £85 

language  of  the  deepest  pathos,  that  desolation  was   nigh 

at  hand,  that  the  hour  of  mercy  had  at  length 

passed  away,  and  that  justice,  temporal  and 

eternal,  must  now  be  the  portion   of  the  city  that  had 

poured    out   the   blood    of  Jehovah's   prophets,   and   was 

thirsting  for  the  blood  of  His  Son.1 

The  scene  changes  with  a  marvellous  truthfulness  and 
appropriateness.   After  our  Lord  had  uttered 
His  last  words  of  solemn  denunciation  against     oepoor  widow. 
the  scribes  and  Pharisees,  —  the  consumers       rZex"'.*?.' 
of  widows'  houses,  the  rapacious,  the  hypocrit- 
ical, and  the  bloodthirsty,  —  He  turns  His  steps  toward  the 
place  where  free  gifts  and  contributions  for  the  various 
ministrations  of  the  temple  were  offered  by  the  worship- 
pers,  and    sits   there   marking   the  varied    and  variously 
minded    multitude   that   was    now   clustering   round   the 
numerous  chests.2     There  He  beholds  one  of  those  hapless 
ones  of  whom  He  had  but  so  lately  spoken  as  the  victim 
of  the  extortionate  scribe,  in  her  penury  cast- 
ing   in   her   two    mites,  her   all.      And    she 
departed  not  unblest.     That  act  caused  the  Redeemer  of 

1  Tlie  concluding  words  ov  fxij  fj.e  JoeTe  k.  t.  \.  (Matt,  xxiii.  39)  had  reference, 
on  the  former  occasion  that  they  were  uttered,  primarily  to  the  triumphal  entry, 
and  secondarily  to  the  second  advent  (see  above,  p.  241,  note  2);  In* the  present 
the  reference  is  exclusively  to  the  latter.  "Then,"  as  Eutbymius  well  remarks, 
"  will  they  say  this  —  willingly,  never,  but  unwillingly,  at  the  time  of  His  sec- 
ond advent,  when  He  shall  come  with  power  and  great  glory,  and  when  their 
i unit  ion  shall  be  of  no  avail.-'  —  In  Mult,  xxiii.  39. 

2  These,  we  learn  from  Lightfoot  {Decas  Chorogr.  in  Marc.  cap.  3,  §  4),  were 
thirteen  In  number,  called  by  the  Talmudical  writers  Pn"B"W  (from  the  trumpet- 
like  shape  of  the  openings  into  which  the  money  was  dropped,  — "  augustae 
supra  lata;  infra  propter  deceptores  "  —  Gemara  on  Misltna,  "  Shekalim,"  II.  1), 
and  stood  in  the  court  of  the  women.  See  Keland,  Antiq.  1.  8.  14,  and  comp. 
Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "Terapel,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  583. 

B  As  Lightfoot  pertinently  says,  "Haeo  paupercula  duobus  minutis  ajtcmam 
sibi  famam  coemit."—  In  Marc.  xii.  42.  The  grounds  of  the  divine  commenda- 
tion are  distinctly  specified,  —  she  gave  all.  She  might  have  given  one  of  the  two 
Af?rra[the  Rabbinical  citation  iii  Sohoettgen,  in  /<><■.  and  Sep]).  Leben  Chr.  Vol. 
iii.  p.  811,  does  not  Mem  to  refer  to  contributions  like  the  present],  but  .-be  gi\  es 
both.  "The  woman  offered  two  (farthings;  but  .-be  possessed  nothing  more  than 
what  she  offered  ;  she  had  nothing  left;  with  empty  hand,  but  a  hand  bountiful 

of  the  little  Bhe  possess)  d,  she  went  away  from  the  treasury."  —  Cyril  Alex.  Com- 
ment, on  at.  Luke,  Sermon  oxxxvin.  Part  n.  p.  04". 


John  to.  20. 
Ver.  21. 


286  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  YII. 

the  world  to  call  up  to  Him  His  disciples,  and  to  declare 

to  them  that  the  poor  desolate  one  had  cast 

Zidex.ri.2.  in  more   than   all;  yea,  and  one  at  least  of 

Mark  xii.  43.  -. .  -.  .  .  •.  ,  , 

ver.a.  the  hearers  did  so  bear  witness  that,  by  the 

23,notei.'';  "eeP'     record  of  two  Evangelists,  the  widow's  gift, 

like  the  piety  of  Mary  of  Bethany,  shall   be 

known  and  remembered  wheresoever  the  Gospel  shall  be 

preached  unto  men. 

"While,  as  it  would  seem,  our  Lord  was  still  teaching 

within,1  a  strange  message  is  brought  from 

n,c  r^uest  of  the     foQ  court  without.     Some  Greek  proselytes 

Greek  proselytes. 

of  the  gate,  who  had  come  up  to  Jerusalem 
to  worship  the  God  of  the  Jew  and  the  Gentile  at  the 
feast  of  the  Passover,  prefer,  by  the  mouths 
of  the  apostles  Andrew  and  Philip,  a  request 
to  see  Him  of  whom  every  tongue  in  Jerusa- 
lem now  was  speaking,  and  towards  whom  perchance  deep- 
seated  presentiment  had  mysteriously  attracted  these  God- 
fearing Gentiles.2     Deeply  moved  by  a  request  which  He 


1  The  suggestion  of  Greswell  {Dissert.  XL.  Vol.  iii.  p.  123,  note),  that  our  Lord 
sat  and  taught  in  the  court  of  the  women,  in  order  "that  the  female  Israelites 
might  have  access  to  Him,  as  well  as  the  male,"  is  not  without  probability.  It 
must  be  remembered,  however,  that  the  court  of  the  women  (yvvautwinTis, 
Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  VI.  9.  2)  was  so  called,  not  because  it  was  especially  designed 
for  their  use,  but  because  it  was  the  furthest  court  into  which  they  were  per- 
mitted to  enter.  See  Lightfoot,  Decas  Chorogr.  in  Marc.  cap.  3,  §  5.  The 
incident  that  follows  is  also  assigned  by  Greswell  to  the  day  of  our  Lord's 
triumphal  entry;  the  words  kcl\  aweASwv  tKpvfSt)  an  avrwv  (ch.  xii.  36)  seem, 
however,  much  more  in  favor  of  its  present  position.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synops.  p.  396. 

2  The  "EAAijpes  here  mentioned  by  St.  John  are  rightly  considered  by  the 
majority  of  modern  expositors  not  to  have  been,  on  the  one  hand,  purely  hea- 
thens (Chrys.,  Euthym.),  nor  again,  on  the  other,  Hellenists  (Ewald,  Gesch.  Chr. 
p.  392),  but,  in  accordance  with  the  usual  meaning  of  the  word  in  the  K.  T., 
Greeks,  whom,  however,  the  clause  avafiouvovTuv  k.  t.  A.  (observe  the  pres. 
part.)  seems  further  to  specify  as  habitual  worshippers,  and  so,  probably,  as  is 
stated  in  the  text,  "proselytes  of  the  gate,"  many  of  whom  attended  the  great 
feasts.  See  Acts  viii.  27,  Joseph.  Bell.  Jiul.  VI.  9.  3,  and  compare  Lightfoot,  Hor. 
Ilebr.  in  Joann.  xii.  20.  The  reason  why  they  peculiarly  addressed  themselves 
to  the  Apostle  Thilip  can  only  be  a  matter  of  conjecture.  It  has  been  supposed 
that  they  may  have  come  from  Galilee  (De  Wette,  Meyer),  and  from  the  neigh- 
borhood of  Bethsaida,  to  which  place  it  is  here  again  (see  John  i.  45)  specially 
noticed  that  the  apostle  originally  belonged.    It  is,  however,  perhaps,  equally 


Lect.  Vn.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  287 

felt  to  be  yet  another  token  of  His  own  approaching  glori- 
fication, and  of  the  declaration  of  His  name  to  the  wide 
heathen  world  of  which  these  were  the  earliest  fruits,  our 
Lord,  as  it  would  seem,  accedes  to  the  wish.1  In  their 
hearing  and  in  that  of  the  people  around  He  reveals,  by 
means  of  a  similitude    appropriately  taken 

111  .  Per.  24. 

from  the  teaching  of  nature,  that  truth  which 
it  was  so  hard  for  the  Greek  mind  with  its  deifying  love 
of  the  living  and  the  beautiful  to  conceive  or  to  realize  — 
that  unto  man  the  pathway  to  true  life  lay  through  the 
dreaded  gates  of  death  and  decay.  And  if  to  man,  so  also, 
by  the  mystery  of  redeeming  love,  in  a  certain  measure,  to 
the  Son  of  Man  Himself,  —  a  thought  which  so  moved  the 
depths  of  the  Saviour's  soul,2  and  called  forth  from  His 

probable  that  they  were  complete  strangers,  but  attracted  to  Philip  by  his  Gre- 
cized  name.  The  conduct  of  the  apostle  on  the  present  occasion,  and  his  appli- 
cation to  Andrew  ("cum  Bodali  audet," —  Beng.),  has  been  rightly  judged  to 
indicate  a  cautious,  wise,  and  circumspect  nature.  Compare  Luthardt,  Julian. 
Evang.  Tart  i.  p.  102. 

1  This  has  been  considered  doubtful.  It  is,  however,  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  such  a  request,  thus  sanctioned  by  two  apostles,  would  not  be  refused  by 
our  Lord,  especially  as  the  character  of  the  applicants  {aualiaii'SvTciiv  'iva  ir^oa- 
Kvvi\aovaiv  iv  rf/  &>pvp,  vcr.  20)  seems  to  show  that  it  did  not  result  from  mere 
curiosity.  The  first  portion  of  our  Lord's  reply  (ver.  23)  may  have  been  ad- 
dressed only  to  the  two  apostles  on  the  way  to  the  outer  court,  the  rest  uttered 
in  the  hearing  of  the  Greeks  and  the  multitude  (ver.  2'.»).  On  the  whole  incident, 
so-  Lange,  A* bi  n  ■<<  sw,  n.  6.  5,  Part  n.  p.  1200  sq. 

-'  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that,  as  in  the  more  awful  scene  in  Gethsemane  (Matt. 
xxvi.  3S,  Mark  xiv.  84),  the  Evangelist  has  been  specially  mined  to  record  that 
the  soul  Of  the  Saviour  — that  human  ^>"XV  of  which  the  earlier  Apollinarians 
Been)  at  first  even  to  have  denied  the  existence  (Pearson.  Creed,  Vol.  ii.  p.  205, 
ed.  Burton)  —  was  moved  and  troubled  (ver.  27).  On  the  scriptural  meaning  of 
the  term,  and  its  prevailing  reference  to  the  f<  elings  and  aff<  /■Hon*,  rather  than 
to  the  thoughts  or  imaginations,  .-ee  Olshausen,  Opuscula,  p.  168  sq.,  and  comp. 
notes  an  l  Tim.  hi.  16,  ami  Destiny  of  the  i  '/•<  ature,  Senn.  v.  p.  99.  It  is  perhaps 
scarce])  necessary  to  add  that  the  present  troubled  state  of  the  Saviour's  soul  is 
not  for  a  moment  to  he  referred  to  the  mere  apprehension  of  physical  death 
(compare  Liieke  in  loc.),  still  less  of  the  wrath  of  the  devil  (Lightfoot,  in  Joann. 
x ii  28),  but  to  the  profound  consciousness  of  the  close  connection  of  death  with 
sin.  In  dying  for  us,  the  sinless  Saviour  vouchsafed  to  bow  to  a  dispensation 
which  was  the  wages  of  sin  (Bom.  \i.  23);  and  it  was  the  contemplation  of  such 

B  eoiil act  on  the  part  of  the  all- Pure  and  all-Holy  with  everything  that  was  UlOSi 

alien  to  the  divine  nature. — sin,  darkness,  and  death,— 'that  called  forth  the 
Saviour's  presenl  words  (ver.  27),  that  heightened  the  agonies  of  Gethsemane, 
and  found  ii-  deepest  utterance  hi  that  cry  of  unimaginable  suffering  (Matt. 

.\.\\ii.  Ii'.,  .Mark  x\  .  81)  which  was  heard  from  Golgotha,  when  all  that  was  con- 


288  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

divine  lips  such  words  of  self-devotion  and   prayer,  that 

now  again,  in  the  court  of  the  Gentiles,  as 

iiait'.ih.iT.        once  by  the  banks  of  the  Jordan  and  on  the 

Lukcix.?,r>.        Mount  of  the  Transfiguration,  the    answer 

John  xii.  30.  °  ' 

of  Paternal  love  was  vouchsafed,  for  the  sake 
of  those  who  stood  around,  in  audible  accents  of  accept- 
ance and  promise.1 

And  now  the  day  was  far  spent,  and  our  Lord  prepares 

to  leave  His  Father's  house,  and  for  a  short 
from  </,e  ^tempk,  space  to  conceal  Himself  both  from  His  ene- 
anithe  ins,  proph-     mies  apd  fl.om  ^  pronging  multitudes  that 

ver.w.  huno-  on  His  words  and  beheld  His  miracles, 

Vtr.  Si .  O  ' 

and  yet  did  not  and  could  not  fully  believe. 

While  leaving  the  temple,  a  few  words  from  one  of  the 

disciples,  suggested,   perhaps,  by  a  remem- 

Mark-.Tin.  i.        brance  of  an  expression2  in  our  Lord's  recent 

vcr.2.  apostrophe  to  Jerusalem,  call  forth  from  Him 

Vatt.  xriv.  2.  -.-.  .  «        .  . .  ,  r  , 

Lukexxi.6.         a    declaration    01    the    terrible    future    that 

awaited  all  the  grandeur  and  magnificence  of 

the  sumptuous  structure  from  which  He  was  now  taking 


templatcd  was  approaching  its  appalling  realization.  See  LutharcU,  das  Johann. 
Eoang.  Part  n.  p.  252,  and  corap.  Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  Vol.  i.  p.  234  (Burton), 
Jackson,  Comment,  on  the  Creed,  VIII.  14*  Vol.  vii.  p.  502  sq. 

1  All  the  best  commentators  now  admit,  what  indeed  there  never  ought  to  have 
been  any  doubt  of,  the  real  and  objective  nature  of  the  voice  from  heaven.  It 
may  be  observed  that  those  who  heard  appear  to  be  divisible  into  three  classes: 
(1)  the  more  dull-hearted,  who  heard  the  sound,  recognized  from  whence  it  came, 
but  mistook  it  for  thunder;  (2)  the  more  susceptible  hearers,  who  perceived  it  to 
be  a  voice,  aud  imagined  it  to  be  angelical,  but  were  unable  to  distinguish  what 
was  uttered;  (3)  the  smaller  circle,  of  which  the  apostle  who  relates  the  occur- 
rence whs  one,  who  both  heard  the  voice,  knew  whence  it  came,  and  were  ena- 
bled to  understand  the  words  that  were  spoken.  See  the  note  of  Meyer,  in  toe. 
p.  861  (ed.  3),  and  the  brief  but  good  comment  of  Chrysostoin,  in  Joann.  Horn. 
lxvii.  Vol.  viii.  p.  461  (ed.  Lened.  2),  who  has  noticed  the  first  and  second 
classes  of  hearers. 

'■!  The  opinion  of  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  others,  that  the  disciples  were 
led  to  call  our  Lord's  attention  to  the  solidity  of  structure  (Mark  xhi.  1)  and 
general  magnificence  (Luke  xxi.  5)  of  the  temple  from  a  remembrance  of  His 
recent  declaration,  ISov  cupierai  v/xiu  6  oIkos  vfiiov  epij.uos  (Matt,  xxiii.  38),  seems 
highly  probable.  A  declaration  of  speedy  and  all  but  present  desolation  (a<pie- 
rai),  when  all  around  was  so  grand  and  so  stable,  appeared  to  them  wholly 
inexplicable.  On  the  nature  of  the  buildings,  see  Joseph.  Antiq.  sv.  11.  5,  Dell. 
Jiul.  v.  5.  6,  and  cornp.  Lightfoot,  Hoi:  Hebr.  in  Matt.  xxiv.  1. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  289 

His  final  departure.  Such  boding  words  called  for  yet 
fuller  explanation.  On  their  homeward  journey,  as  the 
Lord  was  sitting  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  to 

,  ,  . .         -i  -,  Matt.  xxiv.  3. 

contemplate  perchance  yet  again  the  doomed       Markxiii  s 
city  and  temple  of  which  the  desolation  had 
even  now  begun,  four  of  His  apostles,1  Peter,  and  James, 
and  John,  and  Andrew,  come  to  Him  with 

.  .  .  c  Mark  xiii.  3. 

the    solemn    inquiry    when    this    mournful 
prophecy  was  to  be   fulfilled,  and  when  the  end  of  this 
earthly  state  of  things,  which  they  could  not  but  connect 
with  the  end  of  the  theocracy,2  was  to  be  looked  for  by  the 
children  of  men.    In  a  manner  strikingly  and 

P  J  Matt.  xxiv.  3. 

appropriately  similar  to   that  in  which  the       Markxnn. 

,      ,  T         -,  Luke  xxi.  7. 

question  was  proposed  does  our  Lord  return 

His  answer.     In  a  prophecy,  in  which  at  first  the  fate  of 

the  Holy  City  and  the  end  of  the  world  are 

J  J  Matt.  xxv.  1  tg. 

mysteriously  blended,3  but  which  gradually,       ch. xxv. w,  seep. 

by  means   of   the   solemn   parables   of   the 

Ten  Virgins   and   the   Talents,  and   the   revelation   that 

1  According  to  St.  Matthew,  the  question  was  proposed  by  the  pafrriTal  gener- 
alh  ,  —  :i  statement  which,  when  coupled  with  the  further  remark  of  both  Evan- 
gelists, that  it  was  proposed  privately  (Matt.  xxiv.  3,  Mark  xiii.  3),  admits  of 
the  easy  and  obvious  explanation,  that  none  except  the  chosen  twelve  were 
present  when  the  question  was  proposed,  and  that  the  four  apostles  mentioned 
by  St.  Mark  acted  as  spokesmen  for  the  rest.  A  good  description  of  the  scene 
and  its  accessories  will  be  found  in  Milmau,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p. 
317  uq. 

2  It  has  been  correctly  observed  (compare  Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Part  II.  p.  1257, 
note)  that  the  two  questions  proposed  to  our  Lord  ought  not  to  be  separated  too 
sharply,  or  regarded  as  definitely  referring  to  separate  and  distinct  periods,  but 
only  as  referring  generally  to  the  period  when  the  destruction  recently  foretold 
by  our  Lord  was  actually  to  take  place;  with  this  event  they  instinctively  con- 
nect the  advent  of  the  Messiah  (compare  Matt.  xxiv.  3  with  Mark  xiii.  4  and 
Luke  xxi.  7).  and  of  this  they  not  unnaturally  ask  for  the  prevenient  sign.  The 
connection  of  these  two  events  in  the  mind  of  the  apostles  was  not  improbably 
dm'  to  a  share  in  the  "sententia  apud  gentcm  receptissimi  de  rVMDJO  "T-!"!, 
Doloribut  Bfeasia  [compare  llos.  xiii.  13j.  Id  est.  de  calamitatibus,  qnas  expecta- 
rniit  fUturas  ad  adventnm  Messiae." —  Lightfoot,  Hor.  llcbr.  in  Marc.  xiii.  9. 
Compare  also  Schoettgen,  loo.  cit.  Vol.  ii.  p.  550. 

3  The  limits  and  general  character  of  these  notes  preclude  any  regular  discus- 
sion of  this  solemn  and  difficult  prophecy.  It  maybe  remarked,  however,  (o) 
that  it  appears  exegetically  correct,  with  the  majority  of  modern  expositors,  to 
recognize  a  change  of  eubjeol  at  .Matt.  xxiv.  29  (not,  with  Chrys.,  at  ver.  23),  so 
that  what  has  preceded  is  to  be  referred  mainly,  but  not  exclusively,  to  the 


290  THE   LAST  PASSOVER,  Lect.  VII. 

follows,  unfolds  itself  into  a  distinct  declaration  of  the 
circumstances  of  the  Last  Judgment,  the  Saviour  of  the 
world  vouchsafes  an  explicit  answer  to  the  questions  of 
His  amazed  hearers ;  yea,  too,  and  on  the  slopes  of  that 
very  mountain  where  mysterious  prophecy1  seems  to  indi- 
cate that  He  who  then  spake  as  our  Redeemer  will  here- 
after appear  as  our  King  and  our  Judge. 

The  day  that  followed  was  spent  in  that  holy  retirement 
into  which,  as  it  would  seem  from  St.  John, 

Consultation     of  T  -,  i  i  • ,  i     n  t 

the  sanhedrin  and     our  JLora  now  solemnly  withdrew,  and  ap- 

l7et,Zc°y/udaS     Pears   only  to   have   been   marked   by   two 

„    ..  „„  events,  first  the  formal  and  deliberate  consul- 

Ch.  xii.  3G.  ' 

tation  of  the  Sanhedrin  how  they  might  best 

carry  out  their  designs,  and  secondly  their  compact  with 

the  traitor  Judas,  who  perhaps  might  have 

V  "  ..' '         availed   himself  of  this  very  retirement   of 

Luke  xxu.  3.  •> 

our  Lord  for  seeking  out  the  chief  priests, 
and  for  bringing  the  designs  of  his  now  satanically 
possessed  heart  to  their  awful  and  impious  completion. 

On  the  next  day,  and,  as  we  may  perhaps  with  some 
reason  be  led  to  think,  so  near  its  close2  as  to  be  really  on 

destruction  of  Jerusalem;  what  follows,  mainly  but  not  exclusively  (see  below) 
to  our  Lord's  second  advent  and  the  final  judgment;  (b)  that  the  difficult  word 
€u&e'o)S  (6/u.od  yap  cxeSif  airavra  yiverat,  Chrys.)  is  to  be  explained  by  the 
apparent  fact  that  towards  the  close  of  the  former  part  of  the  prophecy  the 
description  of  the  events  connected  with  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  becomes  identical 
with,  and  gradually  (ver.  27,  28)  passes  into,  that  of  the  end  of  the  world;  (c) 
that  the  appended  parable  (ver.  32  sq.)  refers  to  both  events,  the  ir&vTa  ravra 
(ver.  34)  belonging  exclusively  to  the  events  preceding  the  fall  of  Jerusalem,  and 
standing  in  clear  contrast  to  the  fi/xipa  e  k  e  i  vt\  (ver.  36)  which  obviously  refers 
exclusively  to  the  end  of  the  world.  For  more  special  explanations  the  student 
may  be  referred  to  the  excellent  comments  of  Chrysostom,  in  Matt.  Horn. 
lxxv.— lxxvii.,  Stier,  Disc,  of  Our  Lord,  Vol.  iii.  p.  244  sq.  (Clark),  Lange, 
Leben  Jesu,  n.  6.  7,  Part  ir.  p.  1253,  and,  with  reservations,  to  the  special  trea- 
tises of  Dorner  (de  Orat.  CJir.  Eschatolog.  Stuttg.  1844),  E.  J.  Meyer  (Komment. 
zu  Matt.  xxiv.  xxv.,  Frankf.  1857).  and  the  commentary  of  Meyer  (H.  W.),  p. 
433  sq.  (ed.  4). 

1  Oh  the  prophetic  declaration  of  the.  appearance  of  the  Lord  on  Olivet.  (Zech. 
xiv.  4),  and  its  supposed  reference  to  the  circumstances  of  His  second  advent, 
and  to  the  locality  of  His  seat  of  judgment,  see  Jackson,  On  the  Creed,  Vol.  x. 
p.  196. 

2  See  Greswell,  Dissert,  xli.  Vol.  iii.  p.  170  sq.,  where  it  is  shown,  on  the 
authority  of  Maimonides  and  Apollinarius  of  Laodicea  that  the  proper  begin- 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  291 

the  commencement  (according  to  Jewish  reckoning)  of  the 

fourteenth  of  Nisan,  the  day  on  which  the 

paschal  lamb  was  to  be  killed  and  preparation     ^th*  iZi  Supper 

made  for  the  celebration  of  the  Passover,  we     <-n,"s'la^- 

are  told  by  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists      JJaS? 

that  our  Lord   answers  the  inquiry  of   His 

disciples,  where  He  would  have  preparation  made  for  eating 

the  Passover,  by  sending  Peter  and  John  to 

Luke  xxii  8. 

the  house  of  a  believing  follower1  with  a 
special  message,  and  with  orders  there  to  make  ready. 
Thither,  it  would  seem,  our  Lord  shortly  afterwards  fol- 
lowed them  with  the  rest  of  the  disciples,  and  partook  of 
a  supper,  which  the  distinct  expressions  of  the  first  three 
Evangelists8  leave  us  no  ground  for  doubting  was  a  ^a*- 
chal  supper,  but  which  the  equally  distinct  expressions  of 
the  fourth  Evangelist,"'  combined  with  the  peculiar  nature 


ning  of  any  feast-day  was  reckoned  from  tlie  night  [eve]  which  preceded  it. 
irtei  n'li  of  Nisan,  though  not,  strictly  considered,  a  portion  of  the  festival 
(comp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  in.  10.  5),  was  popularly  regarded  as  such,  and,  from  the 
putting  away  of  haven,  which  took  place  immediately  it  commenced,  and  the 
c  -hi ion  from  servile  labor  (romp.  Mishna,  ■■  Pesacfa,"  iv.  5),  was  usually  spoken 
of  as  the  -'first  day  of  unleavened  bread" (Matt.  xxvi.  17,  Mark  xiv.  12.  See 
Joseph.  Antiq.  rr.  16.1,  who  speaks  of  the  festival  as  lasting  eight  days,  and 
compare  Lightfoot,  in  Mure  xiv.  12,  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  IT,  p.  42). 

i  This  supposition  seems  justified  by  the  peculiar  use  of  the  words  specified  by 
all  the  three  Synoptical  Evangelists,  i  8 i5  da ko,\o  s  \4yei  (.Halt.  xxvi.  IS, 
Mark  xiv.  14,  Luke  xxii.  11),  and  still  more  by  the  peculiar  and  confidential 
terms  of  the  message.  Compare  Kahnis,  Lehre  rum  Abendm.  p..5.  When  we 
further  remember  that  the  bearers  of  the  message  were  our  Lord"s  most  chosen 
apostles,  we  Bhall  feel  less  difficulty  in  admitting  the  apparently  inevitable  con- 
elusion  (see  below)  thai  the  supper  was  prepared  within  what  we  have  seen  were 
popularly  considered  the  limits  of  the  festival,  hut  actually  one  day  before  the 
usual  time. 

1  These  are  especially  (payuv  rh  -n-daxa  (Matt.  xxvi.  17,  Mark  xiv.  12.  Luke 
xxii.  7)  and  fToi.uacW  tc»  ndcrxa  (Matt.  xxvi.  l'i,  Mark  xiv.  10,  Luke  xxii.  13), 
both  "f  which  all  sound  principles  of  interpretation  wholly  preclude  our  refer- 
ring, either  here  or  John  xviii.  28  (opp.  to  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  881  sq.), 
to  the  paschal  supper.    ( !omp.  Gesenins,  Theaaur.  Vol.  ii.  p.  1115. 

';  rhese  are  (o)  »Va  <pdya>(Tiv  rb  irdaxa  (ch.  xviii.  28),  alluded  to  in  the  above 
DOte,  and  referred  to  the  day  following  thai  which  we  are  now  considering;  (6) 
the  special  note  of  time  (ch.  \iii.  I)  in  reference  to  a  Bupper  which  it  seems 
nearly  impossible  (opp.  to  Lightfoot,  in  Matt.  xxvi.  6)  to  regard  as  different 
from  tlmt  referred  to  by  the  Synoptical  Evangelists;  (c)the  definition  of  time, 
irapaffKfui]  tov  wacrxa  (ch.  xi\.  it),  which  it  seems  equally  impossible  (opp. to 
fynops.  p.  886),  in   the  language  of  the  N.  T.,  to  understand 


292  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

of  our  Lord's  message  to  the  householder,  give  us  every 
reason  for  believing  was  celebrated  twenty- 

Matt.xxvi.1S.  "-         '  !•  T  i  •  i  • 

r,      ...  oa         four  hours  earlier  than  the  time  when  it  was 

John  xvui.  28. 

celebrated  by  the  chief  priests  and  Pharisees, 
and  apparently  the  whole  body  of  the  nation.1     While 

otherwise  than  as  "  the  preparation,"  or  day  preceding  the  Passover.  See  Meyer 
in  loc.  p.  478  (ed.  3),  and  Kitto,  Journal  of  Sacr.  Lit.  for  1850,  xi.  p.  75  sq.;  (d) 
the  statement  that  the  Sabbath  in  the  Passover  week  was  "  a  high  day  "  (ch.  xix. 
31),  which  admits  of  no  easy  or  natural  explanation  except  that  of  a  coincidence 
of  the  important  Nisan  15  with  the  weekly  Sabbath.  The  statements  are  so 
clear,  that  to  attempt,  with  Wieseler  (Chron.  Synops.),  Robinson  (Biblioth. 
Sacr.  for  Aug.  1845),  and  others,  to  explain  them  away,  must  be  regarded  as  arbi- 
trary and  hopeless. 

1  From  what  is  here  said,  and  the  above  notes,  it  will  be  seen  that  we  adopt 
the  view  of  the  Greek  Fathers,  and  indeed  of  the  primitive  Church  generally 
(see  the  quotations  in  Greswell,  Dissert,  xli.  Vol.  iii.  p.  168  sq.,  and  add  Clem. 
Alex.  o?i  St.  Luke,  Sermon  cxli.  Part  n.  p.  660,  Trans!.),  that,  even  as  Tal- 
mudical  tradition  (Babyl.  "Sanhedr."  vi.  2)  also  asserts,  our  Lord  suffered  on 
Alsan  14,  and  that  He  ate  the  paschal  supper  on  the  eve  with  which  that  day 
commenced.  In  favor  of  this  opinion  we  may  briefly  urge,  on  the  positive  side, 
(a)  the  statements  of  St.  John  above  alluded  to;  (b)  the  peculiar  nature  of  the 
message  sent  to  the  olKoSto-irdTrjs,  which  seems  to  refer  to  something  special  and 
unusual.  See  above,  p.  291,  note  1;  (c)  the  words  rovro  lb  ir6.axa  (Luke 
xxii.  15),  and  the  desire  expressed  by  our  Lord  (ib.),  both  of  which  well  coincide 
■with  the  assumption  of  a  peculiar  celebration  ;  (d)  several  apparent  hints  in  the 
Synoptical  Gospels  that  the  day  on  which  our  Lord  suffered  was  not  marked  by 
the  Sabbatical  rest  which  belonged  to  Nisan  15.  Comp.  xxvii.  59  sq.,  Mark  xv. 
21  (?),  42,  46,  Luke  xxiii.  26  (?),  54,  46;  (e)  the  anti-typical  relation  of  our  Lord 
to  the  paschal  lamb  (1  Cor.  v.  7),  in  accordance  with  which  the  death  of  our 
Redeemer  on  the  very  day  and  hour  when  the  paschal  Iamb  was  sacrificed  must 
be  reverently  regarded  as  a  coincidence  of  high  probability.  See  Euthym.  in 
Matt.  xxvi.  20.  On  the  negative  side,  we  may  observe  (/)  that  the  main  objec- 
tion, founded  on  the  necessity  of  the  lamb  being  killed  in  the  temple  (Lightfoot, 
in  Matt.  xxvi.  19,  Friedlieb,  Archaol.  §  18,  p.  47),  is  somewhat  shaken  by  the  lan- 
guage of  Philo,  adduced  by  Greswell  I.  c,  p.  14i>  and  still  more  so  by  the  proba- 
bility that  the  time  specified  for  killing  the  lamb,  viz.,  "between  the  two  even- 
ings" (Exod.  xii.  6,  Lev.  xxiii.  3,  Numb.  ix.  3),  might  have  been  understood  lo 
mean  between  the  eves  of  Nisan  14  and  Kisan  15  (see  Lee,  Sevm.  on  Sabb.  p.  22), 
and  that  more  especially  at  a  time  when  the  worshippers  had  become  so  numer- 
ous that  above  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  thousand  lambs  (see  above,  p.  203, 
note  1)  would  have  had  to  be  sacrificed  in  about  two  hours,  if  the  ordinary 
interpretation  of  the  C*2~<n  "pa  had  been  rigorously  observed.  Again,  {g) 
the  silence  of  St.  John  as  to  the  paschal  nature  of  the  supper  is  in  no  way  more 
singular  than  his  silence  as  to  its  Eucharistic  character.  Both  were  well-known 
features  which  it  did  not  fall  in  with  his  divinely  ordered  plan  here  to  specify. 
All  that  it  v.  as  necessary  to  add  so  as  to  obviate  all  misapprehension  be  does 
add,  viz.,  that  the  supper  was  before  the  Passover;  ch.  xiii.  1.  Lastly,  (h)  if  we 
accept  the  highly  probable  statement  that  our  Lord  suffered  A.  D.  30,  and  the 
nearly  certain  statement  that  the  day  of  the  week  was  Friday  (see  Wieseler, 
Chron.  Syn.  p.  334  sq.),  then,  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt,  lie  suffered  on  Kisan 


Lect.  VII.  THE    LAST    PASSOVER.  293 

they  are  taking  their  places  at  the  table  the  same  unbe- 
coming contention  for  priority,  which  we  have  already 
noticed  on  previous  occasions,  again   shows 

,_  „     ,      _        ,  .  .  ,  Sec  )>age  250. 

itself,  called  forth,  perhaps,  in  the  present 
case,  by  a  desire  to  occupy  the  places  nearest  One 
towards  whom  every  hour  was  now  deepening  their  love 
and  devotion.  But  such  demonstrations  were  unmeet 
for  the  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ ;  such  contentions,  though 
not  without  some  excuse,  must  still  be  lovingly  repressed. 
And  in  no  way  could  this  be  more  tenderly  done  than  by 
the  performance  of  every  part  of  an  office  — 

.,,.,„  ...  ,  .  John  xiii.  4, 5. 

that  ot  washing  the  feet  of  those  about  to  sit 
down  to  meat  —  which  usually  fell  to  the  lot  of  a  servant,1 
but  was  now  solemnly  completed  in  the  case  of  each  one 
of  them,  yea,  the  traitor  not  excepted,  by  Him  whom  they 
called,  and  rightly  called,  their  Master  and 
their  Lord.     And  now  the  supper  had  com- 
menced,2 and  round  the  Saviour  were  gathered,  for  the  last 

14,  anil  ate  the  Passover  on  the  first  hours  of  that  day  the  eve  before,  —  calcula- 
tion clearly  showing  that  in  that  year  the  new  moon  of  Nisan  was  on  Wednes- 
day, .March  22,  at  8h.  8m.  in  tlie  evening,  and  that,  consequently,  if  we  allow  the 
usual  two  days  for  the  phase  (see  Greswell,  Dissert.  Vol.  i.  p.  320),  Nisan  1  com- 
menced (according  to  Jewish  reckoning)  on  Friday  evening  March  24,  but  really 
coincided  as  to  daylight  with  Saturday,  March  25,  or  Kisan  14  with  Friday 
April  7.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  446,  whose  own  tables  (indepen- 
dently proved  to  be  accurate)  may  thus  be  used  against  him.  See  also  above,  p. 
182,  note  1.  More  might  be  urged,  but  the  above  considerations  may  perhaps 
lead  us  to  pause  before  we  reject  a  mode  of  reconciliation  so  ancient,  so  free 
from  all  forcings  of  language,  and  apparently  so  reasonable  and  trustworthy. 
For  notices  of  the  many  different  treatises  on  this  difficult  subject,  see  Winer, 
BTTJB.  Art.  •■  Pascha,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  202,  and  Meyer,  Kommcnt.  ub.  Joh.  xviii.  28,  p. 
468  sq.  (ed.  3). 

1  See  Friedlicb,  Archiiol.  §  20,  p.  G4,  and  Meyer  in  loc.  p.  375  (ed.  3).  It  may  be 
observed  that  there  is  some  little  difficulty  in  arranging  the  circumstances  of  the 
Last  Supper  in  their  exact  order,  as  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke  is  not  in  strict 
harmony  with  that  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark.  Of  the  various  possible  ar- 
rangements,  the  connection  adopted  in  the  text,  which  is  closely  in  accordance 
with  that  of  the  best  recent  harmonists,  seems,  on  the  whole,  the  most  satisfac- 
tory. See  Wieseler,  ('limn.  Synops.  p.  :::is  so,.,  Itobiuson,  Harmony,  p.  153  (Tract. 
and  comp,  Greswell,  Dissert,  xui.  Vol.  hi.  p.  179  sq. 

I  There  seems  some  reason  for  accepting,  with  Teschendorf,  the  reading  of 
lil.X.  Cant.,  Orig.  (4),  St'iTrvov  yivofxevov  (John  xiii.  2),  according  to  which  the 
time  Would  seem  to  lie  unhealed  when  our  I. old  and  His  apostles  were  just  in 
the  act  of  sitting  down.     Comp.  .Meyer,  in  Ii"-.     Even,  however,  if  we  retain  the 

'  2.V* 


294  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

time,  those  whom  He  loved  so  well,  and  loved  even  unto 
the  end.     And  yet  the  hand  of  the  betrayer 
vZ-.zi.  was  on -the  table, —  a  thought,  we  are  told, 

that  so  moved  the  very  inward  spirit  of  the 
Lord  that  He  solemnly  announced  it,  and  brought  it  home 
by  a  general  indication1  to  that  small  and  saddened  com- 
pany that   sat   around   Him,  and  that  now 

3Iatl.xxri.22. 

asked  Him,  each  one  of  them  in  the  deep 
trouble   of  his   heart,  whether   it   were   possible   that  it 
could  be  he.     After  a  more  special  and  pri- 
ver'.w.""  vate  indication   had   been   vouchsafed,  and 

xll-hl™^.'        tne  self-convicted  son  of  perdition  had  gone 
forth  into  the  night,  followed  in  due  and  sol- 
emn order  the  institution  of  the  Eucharist,2  and  with  it 
those  mysterious  words  that  seem  to  imply  that  that  most 


received  text,  yevofxivov,  the  meaning  cannot  be  "  supper  being  ended  "  ( Auth. 
Ver. ;  compare  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  p.  64);  for  compare  ver.  4, 12,  26,  but,  "  when 
supper  had  begun,  had  now  taken  place."  Comp.  Lucke,  Commentar  uber  Joh. 
Vol.  ii.  p.  548  (ed.  3). 

1  It  seems  incorrect  and  uncritical  to  confuse  the  general  indication  specified 
in  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  6  eLifidtyas  /iter'  e/xoO  Ty\v  x^Pa  (Matt.  xxvi.  23)  or 
6  f/j./Za.TrTjf.i.ei'os  k.  t.  A.  (Mark  xiv.  20),  with  the  more  particular  oue  John  xiii. 
26.  The  first  merely  indicates  what  is  in  fact  stated  by  St.  John  in  ver.  18,  that 
the  betrayer  was  one  of  those  who  were  now  eating  with  our  Lord;  the  second 
is  a  special  indication  more  particularly  vouchsafed  to  St.  John,  though  perhaps 
in  some  degree  felt  to  be  significant  by  the  rest  of  the  Apostles.  See  Stier, 
Disc,  of  Our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  49  (Clark).  The  change  of  tense  in  St.  Mark 
6  i^airroixtvos  ("  the  dipper  with  me,"  etc.)  has  been  alluded  to  by  Meyer  (in 
loc.)  as  indicating  that  Judas  sat  in  close  proximity  to  our  Lord.  This  does  not 
seem  improbable  (comp.  John  xiii.  26),  and  may  be  thought  to  favor  the  idea 
that  St.  John  was  on  one  side  of  our  Lord,  and  the  traitor  on  the  other.  If, 
however,  we  accept  the  reading  of  Lachmann  and  Tischendorf  in  ver.  24,  veuei 
oiiv  ~S,ill(hv  rieVpos  k  a\  Ae'yei  a  u  t  <$  Elir  e  t  i  s  e  ff  r  1  v,  the  usually  re- 
ceived opinion  that  St.  Peter  was  on  the  other  side  of  our  Lord  will  then  seem 
most  natural. 

2  This  would  seem  not  to  have  taken  place  till  the  traitor  went  out.  The 
strongly  affirmative  cry  efaas  of  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxvi.  25;  compare  Schoettg. 
in  loc.)  appears  to  agree  so  well  with  the  second  and  distinct  indication  of  the 
traitor  in  John  xiii.  26,  after  which  we  know  that  he  went  out,  that  we  can 
hardly  imagine  that  Judas  was  present  at  what  followed.  Again,  John  /.  c. 
seems  to  imply  that  the  supper  was  going  on,  whereas  it  is  certain  that  the  cup  was 
blessed  fJ-era  to  Senrvrjaat,  Luke  xxii.  20,  1  Cor.  xi.  25.  If  this  view  be  correct, 
we  must  suppose  that  the  departure  of  the  traitor  took  place  after  Matt.  xxvi. 
25,  and  that  ver.  26  ta^iovraiv  8e  auTusu  refers  to  a  resumption  of  the  supper 
after  the  interruption  caused  by  his  leaving  the  apartment. 


Lect.  Yir.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  295 

holy  sacrament  was  to  have  relation  not  only  to  the  past, 
hut  to  the  future;  that  it  was  not  only  to  he  commemo- 
rative of  the  sad  hut  blessed  hour  that  then  was  passing, 
hut  prophetic  of  that  hour  of  holy  joy  when  all  shouhl 
again  he  gathered  together,  and  the  Lord  should  drink 
with  his  chosen  ones  the  new  paschal  wine  in  the  king- 
dom of  God.1  After  a  few  melancholy  words  on  the  dis- 
persion and  failing  faith  of  all  of  those  who  were  then 
around,  yea,  and  even  more  particularly  of  him  who  said 
in  the  warmth  of  his  own  glowing  heart  that  he  would  lay 
down  his  life  for  his  Master,  and  follow  Him 
to  prison  and  to  death,  our    Lord   appears       JToh,"  riii:s!: 

r  '  11  Luke  x.m.33. 

to  have  uttered    the  longer    and  reassuring 

address  which  forms  the  fourteenth  chapter  of  the  Gospel 

of  St.  John,  and   which   ceased  only  to  he 

resumed    again,   perchance,    while    all    were 

standing  in   attitude  to  depart,2   in  the   sublime  chapters 


l  The  meaning  of  this  mysterious  declaration  can  only  be  humbly  surmised. 
It  would  appear,  however,  from  the  peculiar  distinctness  of  the  expressions 
(tovtou  tov  yevvi)/j.aros  t?/s  a/j.Tr4\ov,  Matt.  xxvi.  29),  that  there  is  a  reference 
to  some  future  participation  in  elements  which  a  glorified  creation  may  sup- 
ply (comp.  Rev.  xxii.  2).  perchance  at  that  mystic  marriage  supper  of  the  Lamb 
|  Rev,  xix.  9),  when  the  Lord  and  those  that  love  Him  shall  be  visibly  united  in 
the  kingdom  of  God,  nevermore  to  part.  The  reference  to  our  Lord's  compan- 
ionship with  His  disciples  after  the  resurrection  (Theopbyl.,  Euthym.)  can  never 
be  accepted  ns  aii  adequate  explanation  of  this  most  mysterious  yet  most  exalt- 
ing promise.  See  especially  Stier,  Disc,  qf  Our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  1C3  sq.,  and 
compare  Krummacher,  Hie  Sufft  ring  Saviour,  ch.  v.  p.  44  (Clark). 

-  It  scarcely  Beems  probable  that  .John  xv.  1  sq.  was  uttered  in  a  different  and 
place  (comp.  Chrysost.  in  he.)  than  that  in  which  the  preceding  discourse 
had  been  delivered,  still  less  that  it  was  uttered  on  the  way  to  Gethsemane.  The 
vii-w  adopted  by  Luthardt  [das  Johann.  Evang.  Part.  n.  p.  821 ).  Stier  ( Disc.  <<f 
0  vr  Lord,  Vol.  vi.  p.  20G),  and  other  recent  expositors,  viz.,  that  our  Lord  uttered 
tin-  discourses  in  the  fifteenth  and  two  following  chapters  in  the  paschal  apart- 
ment, on  the  point  of  departure,  and  with  the  disciples  Btanding  round  Him, 
Beems  much  mure  natural.  The  reference  to  the  vine  (ver.  1)  lias  led  to  several 
arbitrary  assumptions,  e.g.,  that  it  was  suggested  by  the  vineyards  through 
which  they  are  to  be  supposed  to  have  been  passing  (Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  Part 
ii.  i).  1847),  or  by  the  vine  on  the  door  of  the  holy  place  (Joseph.  Aittig.  xv.  11. 
whioh  it  has  been  thought  alhfsion  may  have  been  made  (Lampe,  in  !<>c). 
If  we  are  to  presume  that  this  heavenly  discourse  was  suggested  by  anything 
outward,  "the  fruit  of  the  vine,"  of  w  hicfa  all  had  mi  solemnly  partaken,  would 
seem  to  be  the  more  natural  object  that  gave  rise  to  the  comparison.  SecGro- 
ti\u  in  loo.,  and  Stier,  Di  --.  <■/  Our  1. <>r<l,  Vol.  vi.  p.  -■',[)  (Clark). 


296  THE  LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

which  follow.  "With  the  high-priestly  prayer  in  the 
seventeenth  chapter,  in  which,  as  it  were,  in  rapt  and  holy 
retrospect  the  Lord  contemplates  and  dedicates  to  His 
heavenly  Father  His  completed  work,1  the  solemn  scene 
comes  to  its  exalted  close. 

Still  followed  by  the  yet  undispersed  eleven,  our  Lord 

now  leaves  that  upper  room  which  had  been 

GcihLn"ue(Thurt     the  witness  of  such  adorable  mysteries,  and, 

daumyiu).  passing  out  of  the  city  and  down  the  deep 

John  xviii.  1.  *  °  " 

gorge  on  its  eastern   side,  crosses  over  the 
Kedron  to  a  garden  at  the  foot  of  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
where,  as  we  learn  from  St.  John,  He  was 
Lukc2u.%^°mP'    often  wont  to  resort,  and  to  which  the  pro- 
duce of  the  adjacent  hill  gave  the  name  of 
Gethsemane.2     Arrived  at  this  spot,  the  Lord  leaves  the 
greater  part  of  His  saddened  Apostles  in  the 

Uomp.  Matt.  xxvi.       °  , 

*s.  outskirts  of  the  garden,  while  with  His  three 

more  especially  chosen  attendants,  Peter  and 

the  two  sons  of  Zebedee,  He  Himself  advances  farther  into 

the  solitude  and  gloom.3    And  now  was  solemnly  disclosed 

1  Though  it  is  right  to  be  cautious  in  pressing  grammatical  distinctions,  it 
still  seems  probable  that  the  significant  aorists  in  John  xvii.  4  sq.,  iSu^affa, 
(Te\eicoaa,  icpavepwaa  k.  t.  A.,  point  to  a  contemplation,  on  the  part  of  the 
Saviour,  of  His  work  on  earth  as  now  completed  and  concluded.  He  now 
stands  as  it  were  at  the  goal,  and  in  holy  retrospect  commends  both  His  work 
and  those  loved  ones  who  had  been  permitted  to  witness  it  to  the  Eternal  Father 
in  a  prayer  which  has  been  rightly  regarded  by  all  deeper  expositors  as  the 
most  affecting  and  most  sublime  outpouring  of  love  and  devotion  that  stands 
recorded  on  the  pages  of  the  Book  of  Life.  See  Luthardt,  das  Johann.  Evang. 
Part  II.  p.  354,  and  the  admirable  exposition  of  Stier,  Disc,  of  Our  Lord,  Vol. 
vi.  p.  421  sq. 

2  The  most  probable  derivation  appears  to  be  tW»'i  M4  ("oil-press").  See 
Winer,  Bll'B.  Vol.  i.  p.  424,  and  comp.  Bynajus,  de  Morte  Christi,  n.  2.  6,  Fart 
ii.  p.  73.  For  an  account  of  the  place  with  which  Gethsemane  has  been  identi- 
fied by  modern  travellers,  see  Robinson,  Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  234  sq.  (ed.  2.), 
Smith,  Diet,  of  Bible,  Vol.  i.  p.  684;  but  compare  Thomson,  Land  and  the  Book, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  483.  For  a  representation,  see  Robertson  and  Beato,  Views  of  Jerusa- 
lem, No.  20. 

a  The  conjecture  of  Dean  Alford  that  our  Lord  retired  with  the  three  Apos- 
tles into  a  portion  of  the  garden  from  which  the  moonlight  might  have  been 
intercepted  by  the  rocks  and  buildings  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  gorge,  does 
not  seem  improbable,  or  at  variance  with  the  supposed  site.  Comp.  Kobinson, 
Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  235. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  297 

a  mystery  of  unimaginable  sufferings  and  woe.     Removed 
from  the  three  Apostles,  but  only  at  such  a 

.„,..,  Matt.  xxvi.  30. 

distance   that  their  eyes  might  still  behold 
and  their  poor  human  hearts  strive  to  sympathize1  with 
the    now    consciously    deepening    agony   of 
their  beloved  Master,  the  Eternal  Son  kneels,       Lm.-. .■....«.  a. 
bows,  and  falls  forward  on  the  earth.    Twice       *■*■*.* 
did  the  prayer  pass  those  suffering  lips,  that  if  it  were  pos- 
sible, —  if  it  were  compatible  with  His  Father's  glory  and 
the   world's   salvation,  —  this   cup,  this  cup  of  a  present 
anguish,  in  which,  in  an  awful  and  indivisible  unity,  all  the 
future  was  included,  might   pass  from  Him;2  and  twice, 
with  words  of  meekest  resignation,  did  He 
yield    Himself  to  the  heavenly  will  of  Him        "/^ 
with    whom  He    Himself  was  one.     Twice 
did    He  return  to  the  three  chosen  ones  whom  He  had 
bidden  to  watch  with   Him   in  this   awful  hour  of  utter- 


1  While,  with  the  older  expositors,  we  mny  reasonably  believe  that  our  Lord 
was  pleased  to  take  the  three  Apostles  with  Him  that  they  might  be  eye-wit- 
ness b  to  His  church  of  His  mysterious  agony  (oWe  eV8ei£<x<r,<ht<  avrois  tcc  t-Ijs 
Ai'jttjs,  Kiith\  in.  in  Matt.  xxvi.  37),  we  may  perhaps  also,  with  the  best  modern 
expositors,  presume  to  infer  from  the  special  exhortation  ypriyopelre  (ia 
t  fxov  (Jllatt.  xxvi.  39)  that  the  Redeemer  of  the  world  vouchsafed  to  desire  the 
human  sympathy  of  these  His  chosen  followers.  See  Stier,  Disc,  of  Our  Lord, 
Vol.  \ii.  p.  225,  where  the  practical  aspects  of  this  opinion  are  fittingly  alluded 
to.  and  compare  Krummacher,  The  Suffering  Christ,  §  12,  p.  9G  (Clark),  Ewald, 

'  '/iris/its',  p.  -114. 

2  To  regard  this  most  holy  prayer  as  merely  expressive  of  that  shrinking  from 
death  and  Buffering  (Meyer,  al.)  which  belongs  to  the  nature  our  Lord  was 
pleased  to  assume,  is  as  unfitting,  on  the  one  hand,  as  it  is  precarious,  on  the 
oilier,  to  refer  the  anguish  and  amazement  thai  preceded  it  either  to  the  visible 
appearance  ("  in  forma  Bcilicel  aliquik  dira  el  horrenda,"  Lightfoot,  Hot.  Hebr.  in 
loc.)  of  the  Prince  of  Darkness,  or  to  a  sense  of  the  punitive  withdrawal  of 
the  Paternal  presence  (Krummacher,  p.  97,  in  language  unwarrantably  strong) 
fl  i. m  Him  who,  though  now  feeling  the  full  pressure  of  the  burden  of  a  world's 
Bin,  not  <'iii.\  could  say,  but  did  say,  "  Abba,  Father."  See  Stier,  Disc,  of  Our 
J, i>nt.  Vol.  vii,  p.  287.  Heavy  indeed  was  the  burden  of  sin.  for  it  bowed  the 
Saviour  to  the  earth  (Mark  xiv.  35);  fearful  the  assaults  of  the  powers  of  evil, 
for  their  hour  was  at  band  (Luke  xxii.  68);  but  it  was  to  the  vivid  clearness  of 
the  Saviour's  knowledge  of  the  awful  affinity  between  death,  sin,  and  the  powers 
of  darkness  (see  p.  287,  note  2)  that  we  may  humbly  presume  to  refer  the  truest 
bitterness  of  the  cup  of  Getbsemane.    See  Beck,  Lehrwissenschaft,  p.  614 

■ ).  and  compare  P<  arson,  ( '/••  ■  <t,  Vol.  i.  p,  231  (cd.  Burt.),  Jackson,  (  rw/, 
viii.  12.  4.    Vol.  vii.  p.  472  sq. 


298  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

most  conflict,  and  twice  did  He  find  Himself  bereft  even 

of  human  sympathy  —  unwatched  with,  unheeded,  alone. 

Yet  a  third  time,  if  we   here1  incorporate  the  narrative 

of  the  third  Evangelist,  even  while  the  min- 

Mutt.  XXO.  42.  ,  .      .  ,  .   .    . 

istry  oi  the  sustaining  angel  and  the  thick- 
falling  drops  of  bloody  sweat2  alike  bore  witness  to  an 
agony  fast  transcending  the  powers  of  our  common  hu- 
manity,—  yet  a  third  time  was  that  prayer  offered  to  the 
Eternal  Father,  and  again  was  it  answered  by  the  meek 
resignation  of  the  Eternal  Son.  For  the  last  time  the 
Lord  returns  to  His  slumbering  Apostles,  and 
now,  with  words  that  sadlv  remind  them  that 

Matt,  x.rri.  45.  '  ... 

the  holy  privilege  of  watching  with  their 
suffering  Master  is  finally  lost  and  forfeited,3  He  forewarns 
them  that  the  hour  is  come  and  the  traitor  nigh  at  hand. 


1  It  is  perhaps  doubtful  whether  we  are  to  consider  the  appearance  of  the  sus- 
taining angel  recorded  by  St.  Luke  as  after  the  first  or  after  the  second  prayer. 
However  this  may  be,  it  seems  right  closely  to  connect  the  angelical  ministra- 
tion and  the  agony  recorded  in  the  next  verse.  The  infused  physical  strength 
(ivicrx"0>v  auTor,  ver.  43;  compare  Matt.  iv.  11)  was  exhibited  in  the  more  ago- 
nized fervency  of  the  prayer  {inTcvtaTtpov  it poa7]vxf 'o ,  ver.  44),  but  in  a  man- 
ner that  showed  that  the  exhaustion  of  the  human  and  bodily  powers  of  the 
Redeemer  had  now  reached  its  uttermost  limit.  The  omission  of  this  verse  (ver. 
43)  and  of  that  which  follows  in  some  manuscripts  [AB;  13.  69,  124],  and  the 
marks  of  suspicion  attached  to  them  in  others  (see  Tisch.  in  loc),  are  apparently 
only  due  to  the  mistaken  opinion  that  the  nature  of  the  contents  of  the  verses 
was  not  consistent  with  the  doctrine  of  our  Lord's  divinity. 

ii  It  has  been  considered  doubtful  whether  the  comparison  of  the  sweat  to  fall- 
ing drops  of  blood  was  only  designed  to  specify  the  thickness  and  greatness  of 
the  drops  (Theophvl.,  Euthym.,  Bynseus),  or  whether  it  also  implies  that  the 
sweat  was  tinged  with  actual  blood,  forced  forth  from  the  pores  of  that  sacred 
body  (comp.  Pearson,  Creed,  Vol.  i.  p.  233,  ed.  Burt)  in  the  agony  of  the  struggle. 
The  latter  opinion  seems  most  probable,  and  most  coincident  with  the  language 
of  the  inspired  writer.  If  the  use  of  &><rel  shows  that  what  fell  were  not  drops 
of  blood,  but  of  sweat,  the  special  addition  of  dijxaTos  seems  certainly  to  indi- 
cate the  peculiar  nature  of  the  sweat,  viz.,  as  an  iop&s  ai/xaronOTis  (Diod.  Sic. 
Hist.  XVII. 90), and  to  direct  attention  to  that  with  which  it  was  tinged  and  com- 
mingled. See  Meyer  on  Luke  xxii.  44,  and  for  notices  of  partial  analogies, 
Jackson,  Creed,  Vol.  vii.  p.  483,  Bynseus  de  Aforte  C/tristi,  Part  ll.  p.  133. 

3  The  exact  meaning  of  the  words  Ka&tvStre  rb  Aunrov  kol\  avairavtade 
(Matt.  xxvi.  45)  has  been  somewhat  differently  estimated.  To  find  in  them  a 
sort  of  mournful  irony  (Meyer,  in  loc.),  is,  to  use  the  mildest  term,  psychologi- 
cally unnatural,  and  to  take  them  in  an  interrogative  sense  (Greswell,  Dissert. 
XLII.  Vol.  iii.  p.  194),  in  a  high  degree  improbable.  We  must,  then,  either  supply 
an  et  5iW(X<d-e,  with  Euihvniius,  or,  as  seems  much  more  natural,  regard  the 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  209 

Nigh   indeed  lie  -was ;  for  even  now  as  the  Lord  -was 
speaking   an    armed    heathen !    and    Jewish 

....  ,  -.      .  -I11.il  77"'    brlrnt/nl    «f 

band,  with  torches   and   lanterns,  led   by  the     our  Lord. 
lost  Apostle,  arrives   before  the    entrance   of      «w*afo.«. 

,  -.  vm  m         ji  i  John  xviii.  ■>. 

the  garden.      \\  hue    they  pause,  perchance,       Luke  jju.-x. 
and    stand    consulting   how   they    may   best 
provide  against  every  possibility  of  escape,  He  whom  they 
were  seeking,  with  all  the  holy  calm  of  pre- 

a  John  tv lit.  4. 

science,  comes  forth  from  the  enclosure,  ami 
stands   face  to  face   with   the   apostate   and  his  company. 
And  now  follows  a  scene  of  rapidly  succeeding  incidents, 
— the  traitor's  kiss,2  the  Lord's  question  to  the  soldiers,  and 
avowal  of  Himself  as  Him  whom  they  were 

John  xviii,  '•. 

seeking;  the  involuntary  homage  of  the  ter- 
ror-stricken baud  ;;!  the   tender  solicitude  of  the  Lord  for 


words  as  spoken  with  a  kind  of  permissive  force  (Winer,  Oram.  §  43,  p.  278), 
and  in  tones  in  which  merciful  reproach  was  blended  with  calm  resignation: 
SttKvvs,  on  ov8ei>  ttjs  ajTwu  SeiYat  @07]&eias,  i<a\  oti  5e?  iravTws  avrbv  irapaSo- 
&i)i>ai.  —  (his.  Ml  /iic  Horn,  lxxxui.  With  this  the  eyeiptoSe,  ayoo/xtv  (ver. 
48)  that  follows  seems  in  no  way  inconsistent.  The  former  words  were  rather  in 
the  accents  of  a  pensive  contemplation,  the  latter  in  the  tones  of  exhortation 
and  command.  Comp.  Mark  JCiv.  41.  where  the  inserted  a-nt^n  seems  exactly 
to  mark  the  change  in  tone  and  expression. 

1  From  the  term  aireipa  used  by  St.  John  (ch.  xviii.  3),  and  the  separate  men- 
tion of  vwnpeTai  4k  tuv  apxieptooi/  teal  <bapiaaicov,  we  must  certainly  conclude 
that  a  portion  of  the  Roman  cohort  (comp.  Valckeu.  Schol.  Vol.  i.  p.  458),  with 
which  the  fortress  of  Antonia  was  usually  garrisoned,  was  now  placed  at  the 
service  of  the  chief-prie.-tl,  part]  ,  probably  for  the  Bake  of  at  once  (pulling  any 
opposition  that  might  be  ottered,  and  thus  of  avoiding  all  chance  of  uproar  at  a 
time  when  public  tranquillity  was  always  liable  to  be  disturbed.  See  I'ricdlieb, 
Archdol.  $  21,  p.  67.  'flat  notice  of  the  "torches  and  lanterns"' (John  xviii.  3) 
that  were  brought,  though  it  was  now  the  time  of  full  moon,  shows  tin  deliber- 
ate nature  of  the  plan,  and  the  determination  to  preclude  every  possibility  of 
escape.    Comp.  Lutbardt,  das  Johann.  Evang.  Part  ii.  p.  378. 

2  It  may  be  observed  that  both  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxvi.  49)  and  St.  Mark  (ch. 
xiv.  4'i)  specially  use  the  compound  form,  KaT((pi\-qff(v.  To  assert  that  this  -'is 
only  another  word  for  i<pihr\o-ev"  (Alton!)  seems  very  precarious,  especially 
when  the  nature  of  the  case  would  render  a  stltdk  <!  manner  of  salutation  highly 
probable.  Meyer  appropriately  cites  Xenoph.  Man.  n.  c.  33,  ws  tovs  ko.\ous 
<piArjo~a.VTos  fxov,  toi/s  5'  ayc&ovs  KCLTa<piKrio~a.vTos . 

3  The  Btatemenl  of  Stier,  that  there  was  here  "no  specific  miracle  apart  from 
the  standing  miracle  of  our  Lord's  personality  itself "  (Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol. 

vii.  p.  271),  may  very  justly  be  called   in   question.      It  seems  much   more  correct 

to  suppose,  with  the  older  expositors,  that  the  might]  « ords  iyw  ti/u  (compare 
Hark  vi.  60)  were  permitted  to  exercise  their  full  miraculous  force,  in  order  that 


300  THE  LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

His  Apostles,  and  their  reciprocated  readiness  to  defend 

Him,  scantily  armed  as  they  were,  even  to 

zTkexxii. ss.         the  death;  the  rash   sword-stroke  of  Peter, 

Ver.tt.  ancj  ^  healing  touch  of  the  divine  hand; 

Luke  xxii.  51.  °  . 

the  Lord's  words  of  meek  protest  to  the  chief 
priests *  and  multitude ;  the  flight  of  the  terrified  Apostles ; 

the  binding  and  leading  away  of  the  now 

forsaken  Redeemer,  —  all  of  which  we  must 
here  not  fail  thus  briefly  to  enumerate,  but  on  the  details 
of  which  our  present  limits  will  not  permit  us  to  enlarge, 
especially  as  there  is  still  so  much  before  us  that  requires 
our  more  close  and  concentrated  attention. 

It  was  now  deep  in  the  night  when  that  mixed  Jewish    • 

and  Gentile  multitude  returned  to  the  city 

The  preliminary  . 

examination  before     with  Him  whom  the  party  of  the  Sanhedrin 

had  so  long  and  so  eagerly  desired  to  seize. 

Directed  probably  by  those  who  sent  them  forth,  or  by 

some  of  the  chief  priests  and  elders  who  we  know  were 

among  the  multitude,  the  soldiers  and  Jewish 

See  below,  note  1. 

johnxviu.i2.         officers2  that  were  with  them  lead  our  Lord 

away    to    the    well-known    and    influential 

Annas,3  who,  if  not  as  president  of  the   Sanhedrin,  yet 

alike  to  friends  and  foes  the  voluntary  nature  of  the  Lord's  surrender  of  Him- 
self might  be  fully  declared.  See  Chrysostom,  in  loc,  and  compare  the  curious 
remarks  of  Origen,  in  Matt.  §  100,  Vol.  iii.  p.  906  (ed.  Bened.). 

1  It  seems  clear,  from  the  inclusive  terms  of  Luke  xxii.  53,  that  not  only  some 
of  the  temple  officers,  but  that  some  even  of  the  members  of  the  Sanhedrin  had 
either  come  with  or  recently  joined  (Euthym.)  the  crowd,  and  were  now  taking 
a  prominent  part  in  the  proceedings.  To  call  this  a  "  Verirrung  der  Tradition  " 
(Meyer,  iib.  Luh:  p.  486)  is  as  arbitrary  as  it  is  presumptuous.  Such  a  fact  is 
neither  unlikely  in  itself  nor  incompatible  with  the  statements  of  the  other 
Evangelists. 

2  The  very  distinct  enumeration  of  those  that  took  part  in  the  present  acts 
(Johnxviii.  12)  may  perhaps  hint  at  the  impression  produced  by  the  preceding 
events,  which  now  led  all  to  help  (Luthardt),but  is  more  probably  only  intended 
to  mark  that  Gentiles  and  Jews  alike  took  part  in  the  heinous  act,  v  cnrelpa  Kal 
6  x'A.'apx°s  forming  a  natural  designation  of  the  one  part,  oi  virriperai.  tcoc 
'lov5a(wp  of  the  other. 

3  This  successful  man  was  appointed  high-priest  by  Quiriuus,  A.  r>.  12,  and  after 
holding  the  office  for  several  years  was  deposed  by  Valerius  Gratus,  the  procu- 
rator of  Judffia  who  preceded  Pilate.  Comp.  Joseph.  Antiq.  xviii.  2. 1  sq.  He 
appears,  however,  to  have  possessed  vast  influence,  as  he  not  only  obtained  the 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  301 

certainly  as  the  father-in-law  of  the  acting  high-priest,  was 
the  fittest  person '  with  whom  to  leave  our  Lord  till  the 
Sanhedrin  could  be  formally  assembled.     The  locality  of 
the  examination  that  followed  is  confessedly  most  difficult 
to  decide  upon,  as  the  first  and  fourth  Evangelists  seem 
here  to  specify  two  different  places,  though 
indeed  it  requires  but  the  simple  and  reason-       j"lin ^,1'^' 
able  supposition  that   Annas   and  Caiaphas 
occupied  a  common  official  residence,  to  unite  their  testi- 
mony, and  to  remove  many  of  the  difficulties  with  which 
this  portion  of  the  sacred   narrative  is  specially  marked.2 
Be  this  as  it  may,  we  can  scarcely  doubt,  from  the  clear 
statements  in  St.  John's   Gospel,  that  a  pre- 

,.  .  r.  .  ....  Ch.  xviii.  IS— 24. 

hminary  examination   ot  an   inquisitorial  na-       „     ... .. 

J  l  Ch.  xrm.  19. 

ture,   in    which   the    Lord    was    questioned, 

perhaps   conversationally,    about   His   followers    and   His 

teaching,  and  which  the  brutal  conduct  of 

Ver.  22, 

one  of  the  attendants  present  seems  to  show 

was  private   and   informal,  took  place   in    the   palace   of 

Annas.     Here,  too,  it  would  seem,  we  must  also  place  the 


high-priesthood  for  his  son  Eleazar,  and  his  son-in-law  Caiaphas,  but  subse- 
quently for  four  other  sons,  under  t he  last  of  whom  James,  the  brother  of  our 
Lord,  was  ]>ut  to  death.  Comp.  Joseph.  Aatiq.  xx.  9.  1.  It  is  thus  highly  prob- 
able that  besides  having  the  title  of  dpxl6Pe"x  merely  as  one  who  had  filled  the 
office,  he  to  a  great  degree  retained  the  powers  he  had  formerly  exercised,  and 
came  to  be  regarded  practically  as  a  kind  of  de  jure  high-priest.  The  opinion 
of  Lightfoot  that  he  was  Sur/mi,  is  not  consistent  with  the  position  of  his  name 
before  Caiaphas,  Luke  iii.  2  (see  Vitringa,  06s.  Sacr.  vi.  p.  529),  and  much  less 
probable  than  the  supposition  of  SeldA  (revived  and  abhr  put  forward  by 
VTieseler,  citron.  Synops.  p.  ISO  sip)  that  he  was  the  Nasi  or  President  of  the 
Sanhedrin,  an  office  not  always  held  by  the  high-priest.  Compare  Friedlieb, 
Archdol.  j  7,  p.  12.  The  latter  view  would  well  account  for  the  preliminary 
examination,  bul  is  not  fully  made  out,  and  hardly  in  accordance  with  John 
xviii  18.    See  below. 

1  The  words  l\v  yap  Trtvdepos  k.  r.  \.  (John  xviii.  13)  seem  certainly  to  point 
to  the  degree  of  relationship  as  the  cause  of  the  sending.  They  are  thus,  to  Bay 
tiic  least,  no)  Inconsistent  with  the  supposition  that  Caiaphas  was  wholly  in  the 
hands  of  his  powerful  father-in-law.  Compare  (thus  far)  Sepp,  Leben  Clirhli, 
vi.  48,  Vol.  iii.  p.  4G3  sq, 

2  So  Entbymius,  in  Matt.  xxvi.  5S,  —  a  very  reasonable  conjecture,  which  has 
been  accepted  by  several  of  the  best  modern  expositors.  See  SrJer,  Disc,  of  our 
Lord,  Vol.vii.  p,  806  (Clark). 

2G 


302  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

three  denials  of  St.  Peter,1  the  last  of  which,  by  the  sort  of 
note  of  time  afforded  by  the  mention  of  the 

Markxiv.  "2.  , 

second  cock-crowing,  must  have  occurred  not 
"very  long  before  the  first  dawning  of  day,2  and  not  improb- 
ably at  the  very  time  that  the  Saviour  was  being  led  away, 

bound,  to   Caiaphas,  across  the   court  where 

John  xviii.  2t.  i  a  i  l  -i  • 

the  Apostle  was  then  standing. 
And  now  day  was  beginning  to  draw  nigh ;  yet,  as  it 
would  seem,  before  its  earliest  rays  the  whole 

The  examination       ■.        -.  p.i  oil-  it  iit 

before  the  Sanhe-     body  oi   the    banhedrin   had   assembled,  as 

(,rin-  it    was   a   case   that    required    secrecy   and 

comp.    Matt,     despatch,   at   the   house    of  the   high-priest 

Caiaphas,    whither   the   Lord    had    recently 

been  brought.3     The  Holy  One  is  now  placed  before  his 


1  The  difficult  question  of  the  harmony  of  the  various  accounts  cannot  here 
be  fully  entered  into.  If  we  allow  ourselves  to  conceive  that  in  the  narrative  of 
St.  John  the  first  and  second  denials  are  transposed,  and  that  the  first  took  place 
at  going  out,  rather  than  coming  in,  there  would  seem  to  result  this  very  natural 
account,  —  that  the  first  denial  took  place  at  the  fire  (Matt.  xxvi.  C9,  Mark  xiv. 
66  sq.,  Luke  xxii.  56,  John  xviii.  25),  and  was  caused  by  the  fixed  recognition 
(Luke  xxii.  56)  of  the  maid  who  admitted  St.  Peter;  that  the  second  took  place 
at  or  near  the  door  leading  out  of  the  court,  to  which  fear  might  have  driven 
the  Apostle  (Matt.  xxvi.  71,  Mark  xiv.  68  sq.,  Luke  xxii.  58,  John  xviii.  17);  and 
that  the  third  took  place  in  the  court,  about  an  hour  afterwards  (Luke  xxii.  59), 
before  several  witnesses,  who  urged  the  peculiar  nature  of  the  Apostle's  harsh 
Galilean  pronunciation  (see  Fricdlieb,  Archaol.  §  25,  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  Vol.  iii. 
p.  478  sq.),  and  near  enough  to  our  Lord  for  Him  to  turn  and  gaze  upon  His  now 
heart-touched  and  repentant  follower.  Minor  discordances,  as  to  the  number 
and  identity  of  the  recognizers,  still  remain ;  but  these,  when  properly  considered, 
will  only  be  found  such  as  serve  the  more  clearly  to  show  not  only  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  inspired  witnesses,  but  the  living  truth  of  the  occurrence.  For 
further  details  see  a  good  note  of  Alford  on  Matt.  xxvi.  69,  Robinson,  Harmony, 
p.  166  note  (Tract  Society),  and  compare  Liechtenstein,  Lebensgesch.  Jes.  p.  427  sq. 

2  From  a  consideration  of  passages  in  ancient  writers  (esp.  Ammian.  Marcel- 
linus,  Hist.  xxii.  14)  Friedlieb  shows  that  the  second  cock-crowing  must  be  as- 
signed to  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  watch,  and  consequently  to  a  time  some- 
where between  the  hours  of  three  and  four  in  the  morning.  See  Archaol.  §  24, 
p.  79,  Wieseler,  Chron.  S>/no2>s.  p.  406,  and  compare  Greswell,  Dissert,  xlii.  Vol. 
iii.  p.  211  sq. 

3  From  the  above  narration  it  will  be  seen  that  the  contested  a-n-earei\ei/  (John 
xviii.  24)  is  taken  in  its  simple  aoristic  sense,  and  as  defining  the  end  of  the  pre- 
liminary examination  before  Annas,  of  which  the  fourth  Evangelist,  true  to  the 
supplemental  nature  of  his  Gospel  (see  p.  30,  note  3),  alone  gives  an  account. 
The  usual  pluperfect  translation  ("  miscratr)  is  open,  in  a  case  like  the  present, 
to  serious  objection  in  a  mere  grammatical  point  of  view  (consider  the  examples 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  303 

prejudiced  and  embittered  judges,  and  proceedings  at 
once  commenced.  These  were  probably  not  gravely 
irregular.  Though  neither  the  time  nor  perhaps  the  place 
of  meeting  were  strictly  legal  in  the  case  of  a  capital  trial 
like  the  present,  there  still  does  not  seem  any  reason  for 
supposing  that  the  council  departed  widely  from  the  out- 
ward rules  of  their  court.1  With  vengeance  in  their  hearts, 
yet,  as  it  would  seem,  with  all  show  of  legal  formality,  they 
lort h with  proceed  to  receive  and  investigate  the  many 
suborned  witnesses  that  were  now  in  readi- 

....  -r,  .      .  Matt,  sen*  60. 

ness  to  bear  their  testimony,    .but  conviction 

is  not  easy.     The  wretched  men,  as  we  may  remember,  so 

gain  say  ed  each  other  that  something  further 

seemed  required  before  the  bloody  sentence       ver.es. 

which   so   many  present  had  now  ready  on 

"      l      m  J  Matt.  xxvi.  G3. 

their  lips    could  with  any  decency  be  pro- 

nouneed.     Meanwhile  the  Lord  was  silent. 

The   witnesses   were   left   to   confute   or  contradict   each 

other;-  even  the  two  that  affected  to  repeat  words  actu- 


in  Winer,  Gr.  §  40,  p.  24G),  especially  as  the  verb  has  a  pluperfect  in  regular  use; 
(■in,  however,  if  these  he  waived,  the  exegctieal  arguments  against  it  seem 
plainly  irresistible.     See  Stier,  Disc.  <>f  Our  Lard,  Vol.  vii.  p.  307  (Clark). 

1  As  the  council  hail  now,  it  would  seem  (LightfOOt,  /fur.  Hebr.  lit  Mutt.  xxvi. 
3),  ceased  to  occupy  its  formal  hall  of  meeting  on  the  south  side  of  the  temple, 
called  Gazith  (P'TUn  TZ'V:  conclave  08281  lapidis),  and  had  moved  elsewhere 
(see  Fried lieb,  Arcltitol.  §  5,  p.  10;  and  correct  accordingly  Miluuiti,  Hist,  of 
Christianity,  chap.  vii.  Vol.  i.  p.  886,  note,  and  p.  344),  meetings  in  the  city  and 
In  the  house  of  the  nigh-priest  may  hare  become  less  out  of  order.  The  time, 
however,  was  not  in  accordance  with  the  principle,  "judicia  capitalia  transi- 
gunt  interdiu,  et  tiniunt  interdiu  "  ((.'em.  Babyl.  "Sanhedr."  iv.  1),  as  the  com- 
ment of  St.  Luke  o>s  iyivero  r]f.Upa  (eh.  xxii.  GO)  would  appear  to  refer  to  the 
concluding  part  of  Hie  trial,  of  the  whole  of  which  he  only  gives  a  summary. 
<  ompare  Sfej  er,  in  loc.  p.  448.  The  preceding  part  of  the  trial  would  thus  seem 
to  have  been  in  the  night.  In  other  respects  it  is  probahle  that  the  prescribed 
forme  were  complied  with.  The  Sanhedristswere  doubtless  resolved  to  condemn 
our  Lord  to  death  at  all  hazards;  it  still  however  seems  clear,  from  the  sacred 
narrative  (Matt.  xxvi.  60, 61),  that  they  observed  the  general  principles  of  the 
laws  relating  to  evidence.  See  Wilson.  Tllustr.  qfthe  New  Test,  oh,  v.  p.  77,  and 
for  a  description  of  the  regular  mode  of  conducting  atrial  compare  Friedlieb, 
'J''.,  and  the  rabbinical  quotations  in  Bepp,  Leben  Christi,  vi.48  Bq., 

Vol    iii-  p,   1'  . 

t  The  difference  of  onr  blessed  Lord's  deportment  before  1 1  i~  different  Judges 
is  worth]  of  notice'.    Before  Annas,  where  the  examination  was  mainly  comer- 


304  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.   _  Lect.  VII. 

ally  spoken,  and  even  in  this  could  not  agree,  were   dis- 
missed without  one   question  being  put  to 
TahihiulT         them   by  the   meek   Sufferer,  who,  even   as 
ancient  prophecy  had  foretold,  still  preserved 
His  solemn  and  impressive  silence.     Foiled  and  perplexed, 
„,..„„  the  high-priest  himself  becomes  interrogator. 

Mark  XI  V.  GO.  o       1  o 

Matt.xxvi.es.  With  a  formal  adjuration,  which  had  the 
effect  of  2?utting  the  accused  under  the  obli- 
gation of  an  oath,  he  puts  a  question1  which,  if  answered 
in  the  affirmative,  would  probably  at  once  ensure  the  Lord's 
condemnation  as  a  false  Messiah,2  and  as  one  against  whom 
the  law  relating  to  the  false  prophet  might 
xviu.  20.'  be  plausibly  brought  to  bear.     And  the  an- 

»  z   •   M        swer  was  given.    He  that  spake  avowed  Him- 

Mark  xi  v.  62.  ~  1 

self  to  be  both  the  Christ  and  the  Son  of 
God ;  yea,  the  Son  of  God  in  no  modified  or  theocratic 
sense,3  but  whom  their  own  eyes  should  behold  sitting  on 


sational,  He  vouchsafes  to  answer,  though,  as  Stier  remarks,  with  dignified  repul. 
fion.  Before  the  injustice  of  the  Sanhedrin  and  the  mockery  of  Herod  He  is 
profoundly  silent.  Before  Pilate,  when  apart  from  the  chief  priests  and  elders 
(contrast  Matt,  xxvii.  12—14),  He  vouchsafes  to  answer  with  gracious  forbear, 
ance,  and  to  bear  testimony  unto  the  truth.  See  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol. 
vii.  p.  311  (Clark). 

1  The  question,  it  has  been  not  improbably  supposed,  was  partially  suggested 
by  the  previous  testimony  about  our  Lord's  destroying  the  temple,  there  being 
an  ancient  rabbinical  tradition  that  when  the  Messiah  came  He  was  to  construct 
a  much  more  glorious  temple  than  the  one  then  existing.  See  especially  Sepp, 
Leben  Christi,  vi.  48,  Vol.  iii.  p.  468  sq. 

2  When  the  high-priest  asked  our  Lord  whether  He  were  "  the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  God"  (Matt.  xxvi.  63),  or  "the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Blessed"  (Mark  xiv. 
61),  he  was  probably  using  with  design  a  title  of  the  Messiah,  which,  though  not 
appropriated  by  custom  to  the  Messiah  (see  p.  239,  note  1),  was  not  wholly  un- 
precedented, and  in  the  present  case  was  particularly  well  calculated  to  lead  to 
some  answer  which  might  justify  condemnation.  If  our  Lord  had  answered 
that  lie  was  truly  the  Messiah,  it  is  possible  the  intention  might  have  been  to 
put  further  questions  as  to  His  relation  with  the  Father,  and  so  lead  Him  to 
declare  before  the  Sanhedrin  what  they  perhaps  knew  He  had  declared  before 
the  people  (John  x.  30).  It  is,  however,  not  improbable  that  the  formal  avowal 
of  Messiahship  would  have  been  deemed  enough  to  justify  condemnation  accord- 
ing to  the  law  alluded  to  in  the  text.  See  the  following  note.  A  slightly  different 
explanation  is  given  by  Wilson,  Must,  of  Xcw  Test.  ch.  IV.  p.  64. 

3  Whatever  may  have  been  the  design  of  the  high-priest  in  putting  the  ques- 
tion to  our  Lord  in  the  peculiar  terms  in  which  we  find  it  specified  both  by  St. 
Matthew  and  St.  Mark,  — whether  it  was  merely  a  formal  though  unusual  title, 


1....T.  \U.  T1IK    LAST    PASSOVER.  oO") 

the  right  hand  of  Him  with  whom  equality  was  now  both 
implied  and  understood,  and  riding  on  the 

1  7  °  Matt.xxvi.6i. 

clouds   of  heaven.      With   those    words    all       Mark  xiv.ea. 

-  „  nil         i  •     i  •  Matt. xxvL 65. 

was  uproar  and  confusion.  I  lie  hign-priest, 
possibly  with  no  pretended  horror,1  rent  his  clothes  ;  the 
excited  council  put  the  question  in  the  new  form  which  it 
had  now  assumed.  Was  it  even  so'?  Did  the  seeming 
mortal  that  stood  before  them  declare  that  He  was  the 
Son  of  God?    Yea,  verily,  He  did.-     Then 

y  Luke  xxii.  70. 

His  blood  be  on  His  head.     \v  orse,  a  thou- 
sand times  worse,  than  false  prophet  or  false   Messiah,  — 
a  blasphemer,  and  that  before  the  high-priest 
and  great  council  of  the  nation,  — let  Him       mmX 
die  the  death. 

After  our  Lord  was  removed  from  the  chamber,  or  per- 
haps even  in  the  presence  of  the  Sanhedrin, 

,  .    ,  ~  *  The  brutal  mock- 

began  a  fearful   scene  of  brutal  ferocity,  in     erU  o/  the  attenj- 

which,  possibly  not  for  the  first  time  in  that 

dreadful   night,'5  the  menial  wretches  that  held  the  Lord 


or  one  chosen  for  sinister  purposes,  —  the  fact  remains  the  same,  that  our  Lord 
gave  marked  prominence  to  the  second  portion  of  the  title,  using  a  known  syn- 
onym and  well-remembered  passage  (Dan.  vii.  13)  to  make  the  meaning  in  which 
1 1 > -  used  it  still  more  explicit,  and  that  it  was  for  claiming  this  that  lie  was  con- 
demned. See  John  xix.  7,  and  the  very  clear  statements  of  Wilson,  Illustr.  of 
the  X.  T.  p.  5  sq. 

1  There  seems  no  good  reason  for  supposing  this  was  either  a  "  stage  trick  " 
(Krummacher),  or  the  result  of  a  concerted  plan.  The  declaration  of  our  Lord 
following  the  formally  assenting  2u  erros  (Matt.  xxvi.  64),  introduced  as  it  is  by 
the  forcible  7rA.T)f  ("  besides  my  assertion,  you  shall  have  the  testimony  of  your 
own  eyes;"  compare  Klotz,Devar.  Vol.  ii.  p.  725).  seems  to  have  tilled  the 
wretched  Caiaphas  with  mingled  rage  and  horror.  lie  gives  full  prominence  t<> 
the  last,  thai  he  may  better  satiate  the  first.  On  the  ceremony  of  rending  gar- 
ments, which  we  learn  was  to  be  performed  standing  (compare  Matt,  xx ( 

and  so  that  the  rent  was  to  be  from  the  neck  straight  downwards  (-lit  Btando; 

a  coll teriua  Don  posterins"  —  liaJmon.  ap.  Buxtorf,  Lex.  Talm.  p.  21 ! 

Friedlieb,  Archaol  |  26,  p.  92,  Sepp.  Leben  Cliristi,  vi.  18,  Vol.  iii.  p.  173,  note. 

2  In  the  words  0/j.t7s  Ktytre,  on  iyd>  tl^i  (Luke  xxii.  70)  the  8ri  is  lightly 
taken  bj  the  besi  expositors  as  argumentative  ("because  I  am  "),  the  sentence 
i  '  being,  to  use  the  language  of  grammarians,  not  objective^  but  causal.  Com- 
pare Donalds.  Or.  ('ruin.  \  584,  615. 

3  It  is  extremely  doubtful  whether  Luke  xxii.  68— 66  is  to  be  conceived  as 
placed  a  little  out  of  its  exact  order,  Or  as  referring  to  insults  and  mockery  in 
the  court  Of  Annas.      The  exact  similarity  of  the  incidents  with  those  Bpecified 

20* 


306  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

now  all  took  their  satanic  part,  and  in  which  the  terms 
used  showed  that  the  recent  declaration  of 

Luke  xxii.  63. 

our  Lord  was  used  as  a  pretext  for  indigni- 
ties and  shameless  violence  that  verily   belonged  to  the 
hour  of  the  powers  of  darkness.     Meanwhile 

Per.  53.  a.        3 

Matt.xxvii.i.        the  confused   court  was  again  reassembled, 
and,  after  some  consultation  how  their  sen- 
tence could  most  hopefully  be  carried   into   effect,1  they 
again  bind  our  Lord,  and  lead  Plim  to  Pon- 

Matl.  xxvii.  2.  ° 

tius  Pilate,  who  was  now  in  his  official  res- 
idence in  Herod's  palace,2  and  had,  as  usual,  come  to  Jeru- 
salem to  preserve  order  during  the  great  yearly  festival. 
We  may  here  pause  for  a  moment  to  observe  that,  from 

the  connection  in  this  portion  of  St.  Mat- 

TJte  fate  of  Judas  ,  ,  t.  .  ,  -,  ,     .     , 

iscariot.  thew  s    narrative,  it    would    certainly    seem 

reasonable  to  suppose  that  it  was  this  last 
act  on  the  part  of  the  Sanhedrin  that  served  suddenly  to 
open  the  eyes  of  the  traitor  Judas  to  the  real  issues  of  his 
appalling  sin.  Covetousness  had  lured  him  on  ;  Satan 
had  blinded  him ;  and  he  could  not  and  would  not  look 
forward  to  all  that  must  inevitably  follow.     But  now  the 


Matt.  xxvi.  67  sq.,  Mark  xiv.  65,  make  the  first  supposition  perhaps  slightly  the 
most  probable. 

1  The  meeting  of  the  council  alluded  to  Matt,  xxvii.  1,  Mark  xv.  1  (compare 
Luke  xxiii.  1,  John  xviii.  28),  and  defined  by  the  second  Evangelist  as  eVl  rb 
■npwi  ("  about  morning; "  Winer,  Gr.  §  49,  p.  353),  was  clearly  not  a  new  meet- 
ing, but,  as  the  language  both  of  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  seems  clearly  to 
imply,  a  continued  session  of  the  former  meeting,  and  that,  too,  in  its  full 
numbers  {Kal  oKov  rb  avutSpiov,  Mark  xv.  1).  The  question  now  before  the 
meeting  was,  how  best  to  consummate  the  judicial  murder  to  which  they  had 
recently  agreed. 

2  Here  appears  to  have  been  the  regular  residence  of  the  procurators  when  in 
Jerusalem.  See  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  n.  14.  8,  QhSipos  5e  r6re  if  to7s  /HacriXeiois 
avXi^erat  (compared  with  Bell.  Jud.  II.  15.  5),  and  see  Winer,  BWB.  Art. 
"Eichthaus,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  329.  This  has  been  recently  denied  by  Ewald  (Gesch, 
Cliristus',  p.  12),  who  states  that  the  temporary  residence  of  the  procurators  was 
in  an  older  palace,  nearer  to  the  fort  of  Antonia,  but  apparently  on  insufficient 
grounds.  For  a  description  of  Herod's  palace,  and  notices  of  the  size  and 
splendor  of  its  apartments,  see  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  v.  4.  4,  Antiq.  xv.  9.  3,  and 
compare  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  VI.  53,  Vol.  iii.  p.  496  sq.,  Ewald,  Gesch.  des  Volk.  Isr. 
Vol.  iv.  p.  493. 


Lect.  Vn.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  307 

lost  man    sees  all.      The  priests,1  at  whose  feet  he  casts 
the  blood-money,  jibe  him  in   language  al- 
most fiendish;  his  soul  is  filled  with  hitter-       Jfa*.***.* 
ness,  darkness,  despair,  and  death.     The  son       Acisi.25. 
of  perdition'2  goes  to  his  own  place. 

But  let  us  return  to  the  further  circumstances  of  our 
Lord's    trial.       The   Redeemer    now   stood 
before  the  gates  of  him  who  bore  the  sword     a/.pelrance  won 
in  Jerusalem,  awaiting   the   message  which       *a*'" 

3  ~  John  xiai.  28. 

the  Sanhedrists,  men  who  shrank  from  leaven 
though    they  shrank   not  from  blood,  had  sent  into  the 
palace  of  the  procurator,  demanding,  as  it  would    seem, 
that  our  Lord  should  at  once  be  put  to  death  as  a  danger- 
ous malefactor.      With  ready  political   tact   the   Roman 

1  The  use  of  the  definite  terms  ev  t<3  yaw  (Matt,  xxvii.  5)  would  certainly  seem 
to  imply  that  the  wretched  traitor  forced  his  way  into  the  inner  portion  of  the 
temple,  where  the  priests  would  now  have  been  preparing  for  the  approaching 
(estiva!  (compare  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  vi.  78,  Vol.  iii.  p.  609),  and  there  flung  down 
the  price  of  blood.  With  regard  to  his  end,  it  is  plainly  impossible  to  interpret 
the  explicit  term  airriy^aro  (Matt,  xxvii.  5)  in  any  other  way  than  as  specifying 
■  self-inflicted  death  by  hanging.  Compare  the  exx.  in  Greswell,  Disst  rt.  xlii. 
Vol.  iii.  ])•  220,  note.  The  notice  in  Acts  i.  18  in  no  way  opposes  this,  but  only 
Btatea  a  frightful  sequel  which  was  observed  to  have  taken  place  by  those, 
probably,  who  found  the  body.  The  explanation  of  Lightfoot  (Hor.  Hear,  in 
Miitl.  I.  <■.),  according  to  which  o.Tfr)y£aro  is  to  be  translated  "  strangulaius  est, 
a  I)iabolo  scilicet,'' is  obviously  untenable.  We  may  say  truly,  with  Chrysos- 
tom,  that  it  was  the  mediate  work  of  .Satan  (avatpu  ire icras  eaurbi/  airoAevat), 
but  must  refer  the  immediate  perpetration  of  the  deed  to  Judas  himself.  For 
further  accounts,  all  exaggerated  or  legendary,  see  the  notices  in  llol'mann, 
I.,  I,,  a  .1,  .-.-»,  p.  333. 

-  This  title,  given  to  the  wretched  man  by  our  Lord  Himself,  in  His  solemn 
high-priestly  prayer  (John  xvii.  12;  compare  vi.  70),  coupled  with  His  previous 
declaration,  KaAbv  i\v  ainw  el  ovk  eyevvi]&T]  0  &v&panros  eKeTvos  (Matt.  xxvi. 
24;  compare  hereon  Krnmmacher,  The  Suffering  Saviour,  p.  69),  win  always  be 
regarded  by  sound  thinkers  as  a  practical  protest  against  all  the  anti-Christian 
attempts  of  later  historical  criticism  (see  the  reft",  in  Meyer,  Komtm  nt.  vii.  Mutt. 
p.  1^7)  to  palliate  the  traitor's  inexpiable  crime,  and  to  make  it  appear  that  he 
only  wished  to  force  our  Lord  to  declare  II is  true  nature,  and  betraj  ed  Him  as 
the  best  means  of  ensuring  it.  Whether  Buch  motives  did  or  did  not  mingle 
with  the  traitor's  besetting  sin  of  coretousneBB  (comp.  ISwald,  Gesch.  Chr.  p.  898 
s(|.),  we  pause  not  to  inquire;  we  only  see  in  his  fearful  end  the  most  dread 
instance  of  the  regular  development  and  enhancement  of  sin  in  the  individual 
(see  Muller,  Doctr.  <>f  sin.  Booh  v.  Vol.  ii.  p.  461,  Clark)  that  is  contained  in  the 
history  of  man,  and  witli  awe  we  behold  in  him  the  only  one  who  received  his 
sentence  in  person  before  tie  last  day.  see  Stier,  Disc.  0/ our  Lord,  Vol. vii, 
p.  66 sq.,  and  a  practical  sermon  by  Pusey,  Paroch.  Serm.  xn.  Vol.  ii-  p- 197. 


Ver.  30. 
£7/.  xxiii. 


308  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VTI. 

comes   forth  at   their  summons,  hut,  with  a  Roman's  in- 
stinctive  respect    for    the    recognized    forms    of  justice, 
demands  the  nature   of  the  charge  brought 

Ver.  29.  . 

against  the  man  on  whom  his  eyes  now  fell, 
and  whose  aspect  proclaimed  His  innocence.  The  accusers 
at  first  answer  evasively ;  but  soon,  as  it 
would  seem  from  the  narrative  of  St.  Luke, 
find  an  answer  that  they  calculated  could  not 
fail  in  appealing  to  a  procurator  of  Judaea.  With  satanically 
prompted  cunning  they  carefully  suppress  the  real  grounds 
on  which  they  had  condemned  the  Saviour,  and  heap  up 
charges  of  a  purely  political  nature;1  chief  among  which 
were  specified,  in  all  their  familiar  sequence  to  the  procu- 
rator's ear,  seditious  agitation,  attempted  prohibition  of 
the  payment  of  the  tribute-money,  and  assumption  of  the 
mixed  civil  and  religious  title  of  King  of  the  Jews.2  It 
seems,  however,  clear  that  from  the  very  first  the  sharp- 
sighted  Roman  perceived  that  it  was  no  case  for  his  tribu- 
nal, that  it  was  wholly  a  matter  of  religious  differences  and 
religious  hate,  and  that  the  meek  prisoner  who  stood 
before  him  was  at  least  innocent  of  the  political  crimes 
that  had  been  laid  to  His  charge  with  such  an  unwonted 
and  suspicious  zeal.3  The  prescribed  forms  must,  however, 
be  gone  through  ;  the  accused  must  be  examined,  and  be 
dealt  with  according  to  the  facts  which  the  examination 

l  This  fact  has  been  alluded  to  by  Wilson,  IUustr.  of  the  New  Test.  p.  5,  and 
has  been  urged  by  Blunt,  Veracity  of  Gospels,  §  13,  p.  50  sq.  (Lond.  1831.)  It  did 
not  escape  the  notice  of  Cyril  Alex.,  who  has  some  good  comments  upon  the 
changed  character  of  the  charges.     Comment,  on  St.  Luke,  Part  n.  p.  709. 

■2  There  are  no  sufficient  grounds  for  rejecting,  with  Meyer  (tib.  Joh.  p.  470, 
ed.  3),  the  usual  and  very  reasonable  supposition  that  St.  Luke's  mention  of  the 
charges  preferred  by  the  Sanhedrin  (ch.  xxiii.  2)  is  to  be  connected  with  Pilate's 
question  as  recorded  by  St.  John  (ch.  xviii.  29).  It  would  seem  that,  at  first,  the 
Sanhedrists  hoped  to  urge  the  procurator  to  accept  the  decision  of  their  own 
court  without  further  inquiry,  but,  finding  this  promptly  and  even  tauntingly 
(John  xviii.  38)  rejected,  they  then  are  driven  to  prefer  specific  charges.  Comp. 
Lange,  Leben  Jem,  II.  7.  7.  Tart  II.  p.  1504  sq.  On  the  nature  of  these  charges 
see  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  340  (Clark). 

S  The  remark  of  Pfenninger  (cited  by  Stier)  is  just  and  pertinent,  that  "  Pilate 
knew  too  much  about  Jewish  expectations  to  suppose  that  the  Sanhedrin  would 
hate  and  persecute  one  who  would  free  them  from  Roman  authority." 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  C09 

may  elicit.     That   examination,   which    (\vc  may  observe 
in  passing)  was  conducted  by  the  procurator 

i  -i  i  T">'  i  %       ■  John  xi'ni.  33* 

in  person,  served  to  deepen  Jrilates  impres- 
sions, ;nid  to  convince  him  that  the  exalted  sufferer,  whose 
mien  and  words  seem  alike  to  have  awed  and  attracted 
him,  was  guiltless  of  everything  save  an  enthusiasm  which 
the  practical  Roman  might  deem  hopeless  and  visionary,8 
but  which  it  was  in  no  way  meet  to  punish  with  the  sword 
of  civil  justice.  And  the  yet  righteous  judge  acts  on  his 
convictions.  He  goes  forth  to  the  Jews  and  declares  the 
Lord's  innocence,  and  only  so  far  listens  to 

.,  i  f    ,,  ,  .,      •  John  xriii.  38. 

the  clamors  ot  the  accusers  as  to  use  their       ,  , 

Luke  xj  hi.  ■"}. 

mention  of  the  name  of  Galilee  as  a  pretext 
for  sending  our  Lord   to  the  Tetrarch  of  that  country,3 
who  was  now  in  Jerusalem  as  a  so-called  wor- 
shipper at  the  paschal  festival.     This  course 
the  dexterous  procurator  failed  not  to  perceive  had  two 
great  advantages :    it  enabled  him,  in  the  first  place,  to  rid 
himself  of  all  further  responsibility,  and   in   the  next  it 
gave  him  an  opportunity  of  exercising  the  true  Roman 
state-craft   of  propitiating   by  a   trifling   act   of  political 
courtesy  a  native  ruler  with  whom  he  had  been  previously 


1  Pilate,  being  only  a  procurator,  though  a  procurator  cum  poteBtate,  had  no 
quaestor  to  conduct  the  examinations,  and  thus,  as  the  Gospels  most  accurately 
record,  performs  that  office  himself.    Compare  Friedlieb,  Architol.  §  31,  p.  105. 

2  On  the  character  of  Pilate  Bee  below,  p.  815,  note  3.  His  memorable  ques- 
tion, "  What  is  truth?  "  (.John  xviii.  38)  which  occurred  in  the  present  part  of  the 
examination,  must  apparently  neither  be  regarded,  with  the  older  writers,  as  the 
expression  of  a  desire  to  know  what  truth  really  was  (Cbrys.,  ah),  nor,  again, 
With  some  recent  expositors,  as  the  cheerless  query  of  the  wearied  and  baffled 
searcher  (Olsbausen,  ah),  but  simply  as  the  half-pitying  question  of  the  practical 
man  of  the  world,  who  felt  that  truth  was  a  phantom,  a  word  that  had  no  polit- 
ical import,  and  regarded  the  attempt  to  connect  it  with  a  kingdom  and  matters 
of  real  life  as  a  delusion  of  harmless  though  pitiable  enthusiasm.  See  Meyer,  in 
loc.  p.  472,  Slier.  /)/.«-.  qf  our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  370  sq.  (Clark),  and  compare 
Luthardt.  Johcm.  Evang.  Part  n.  p.  400. 

3  Pilate  here   availed    himself  of  a   practice  occasionally  adopted  in  criminal 

I  iz.,  that  of  sending  away  (Luke  xiii.  7,  aviire/xxptv  remisit)  the  accused 
from  theybrum  apprefo  nsionis  to  his  forum  originis.  Compare  the  partly  >im- 
ilar  case  in  reference  to  si .  paid  (Acts  xxv.  9  sq.),  and  the  conduct  of  Vespasian 
towards  the  prisoners  who  were  subjects  of  Agrippa,  —  Josepbus,  Bell.  Jud.  in. 
10. 10.    See  Friedlieb,  Archaol.  §  32,  p.  107. 


310  THE    LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

at  enmity,1  and  with   whose   authority  he  had  probably 
often  come  in  collision. 
The  sinful  man 2  before  whom  our  Lord  now  was  brought, 
had,  we  are  told  by  St.  Luke,  long  desired  to 

The  dismissal  of  TT.  ,     .  ....  , 

om- Lm-d to  ue rod.  see  Him,  and  is  now  rejoiced  to  have  the 
<VerfiLi'  wonder-worker  before  him.3     He  puts  many 

questions,  all  probably  superstitious  or  pro- 
fane, bnt  is  met  only  by  a  calm  and  holy  silence.  Super- 
stitions curiosity  soon  changes  to  scorn.  With  a  frightful 
and  shameless  profanity,  the  wretched  man,  after  mocking 

and  setting  at  nought  Iliin  whom  a  moment 

Lulce  xxiii.  11,  -t      p  •/•  ill  ipi 

before,  it  any  response  had   been  vouchsafed 

to  his  curiosity,  he  would  with   equal  levity 

have  honored  as  a  prophet,  now  sends  the 

Lord  back  to  Pilate,  clad  in  a  shining4  kingly  robe,  as  if  to 

1  The  cause  of  the  enmity  is  not  known,  but  is  probably  to  be  referred  to  some 
acts  on  the  part  of  the  procurator  which  were  considered  by  Herod  undue  as- 
sumptions of  authority.  It  is  possible  that  the  recent  slaughter  of  the  Galilaeans 
mentioned  Luke  xiii.  1,  if  it  did  not  give  rise  to.  may  still  have  added  to  the  ill- 
feeling.  The  discreditable  attempts  to  throw  doubt  upou  the  whole  incident,  as 
being  mentioned  only  by  one  Evangelist,  require  no  other  answer  than  the  nar- 
rative itself,  which  exhibits  every  clearest  mark  of  truth  and  originality.  Comp. 
Meyer,  Komment.  ub  Luk.  p.  403  (ed.  S),  Krummacher,  The  Suffering  Christ,  ch. 
xxxi.  p.  268. 

2  On  the  character  of  this  Tetrarch,  which  seems  to  have  been  a  compound  of 
cunning,  levity,  and  licentiousness,  see  above,  p.  201,  note  1. 

3  The  key  to  the  present  conduct  of  this  profane  man  is  apparently  supplied 
us  by  the  observant  comment  (comp.  p.  43,  n.  1)  of  the  thoughtful  Evangelist, 
Ka\  r)A7n£eV  ti  ffrj/xelov  iSe?v  vir'  aurov  yei/o/xei/ov,  Luke  xxiii.  8.  As  long  as 
there  seemed  any  chance  of  this  desire  being  gratified,  Herod  treated  our  Lord 
with  forbearance;  when  it  became  evident  that  he  was  neither  to  see  nor  hear 
anything  wonderful,  he  gave  rein  to  his  wretched  levity,  and  avenged  his  disap- 
pointment by  mockery.  On  the  incident  generally,  see  Lange,  Leben  Jesut 
ii.  7.  7,  Part  in.  p.  1512  sq. 

4  It  has  been  thought  that  by  the  use  of  the  terms  ecr&riTa  \aixirpav  (Luke 
xxiii.  11)  the  Evangelist  intended  to  denote  a  irhite  robe,  and  that  the  point  of 
tlic  profane  mockery  was,  that  our  Lord  was  to  be  deemed  a  "  candidatus."  See 
Friedlieb,  Arch'dol.  §  32,  p.  109,  Lange,  ZebenJesti,  Part  in.  p.  1515.  This  seems 
very  doubtful;  the  word  \a/j.Trpbs  does  not  necessarily  involve  the  idea  of  white- 
ness (the  primary  idea  is  "  visibility"  [Aaco];  see  Donaldson,  Crat.  §  452),  nor 
would  the  dress  of  a  "  candidate"  imply  the  contempt  which  Herod  designed  to 
express  for  the  pretensions  of  this  King  so  well  as  the  "  gorgeous  robe"  (Auth. 
Ver.)  of  caricatured  royalty.  The  remark,  too,  of  Lightfoot  seems  fully  iu 
point,  "  de  veste  alba  cum  aliis  intellexerim,  nisi  quod  videam  hunc  Evangelis- 
ram,  cum  tic  veste  alba  habet  sermonem,  a/bam  earn  vocare  iu  terminis;  "  cap. 
IX.  29,  Acts  i.  10.    Hor.  Sebr.  in  Luc.  xxiii.  7. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  311 

intimate  that  for  such  pretenders  to  the  throne  of  David 
neither  the  Tetrarch  of  Galilee  nor  the  Procurator  of 
Judaea  need  reserve  any  heavier  punishment  than  their 
ridicule  and  contempt. 

We  may  well  conceive  that  Pilate  was  much  perplexed 
at  seeing  our  Lord  again  before  his  own  tri- 

,  .        _        ,  .  Second  appear- 

banal.  In  the  present  appearance,  however,  „„,,,, „,.,•, /•,/,./,  . 
of  the  Saviour,  the  procurator  plainly  saw  a  ^S.'OS€'our 
practical  exhibition  of  Herod's  sentiments, 
and  at  once  resolved  to  set  free  one  who  he  was  new  more 
than  ever  convinced  was  a  harmless  enthusiast,  wholly  and 
entirely  innocent  of  the  crimes  that  had  been  laid  to  His 
charge.     So,  too,  he  tells  the  assembled  chief 

•      ""  i  i      i      rt  ,  «        T)  .  Luke  sxiU.  \r,. 

priests  and  people.     hut,  alas  tor  human  jus- 
tice !  he  seeks  to  secure  their  assent  by  a  promise  of  inflict- 
ing punishment,  lighter  indeed  by  very  far 
than   had  been   demanded,2  yet  still  by  his 
own   previous  declarations  undeserved  and  unjust.     But 
this,  though   a  most  unrighteous  concession,  was  far  from 
satisfying  the  bitter  and  bloodthirsty  men  to  whom  it  was 
made.     Something  perchance   in  their   countenances  and 
gestures8  drove  the  now  anxious  judge  to  an  appeal  to  the 
people,  who,  he  might  have  heard  and  even 

■it  t-         i  l  •  i  Hark  a to.  3. 

observed,  were  tor  the  most  part  on  the  side 

of  the  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  and  whose  clamorous  requests 

i  We  may  observe  that  St.  Luke  specially  notices  tliat  on  tlie  return  of  our 
Lord  from  Herod,  Pilate  assembled  not  only  the  cbief  priests  and  rulers,  but  the 
people  also  (cli.  ,\.\iii.  13);  he  probably  had  already  resolved  to  make  an  appeal 
to  tin  iik  if  his  pi!  -i  hi  proposal  (ver.  1G)  were  not  accepted.  See  above,  p.  2C3, 
note  1. 

2  The  punishment  Implied  in  the  term  TraiSeucras  (Luke  xxiii.  16)  is  left  unde- 
fined. It  was,  however,  probably  no  severer  than  scourging.  Comp.  Bammond, 
in  Inc.  Here  was  Pilate's  first  concession,  and  fust  betrayal  of  a  desire,  if  pos- 
sible, in  meet  the  wishes  of  the  accusers.  This  was  not  lost  on  men  so  subtle 
and  so  malignant  as  the  Sanhedrists. 

8  There  is  a  Blight  difficulty  in  the  fact,  that,  according  to  St.  Luke  (xxiii.  18; 
ver.  17  is  ul'  doubtful  auihorih  ).  the  request  in  reference  to  Barabbas  comes  Brat 
from  the  people,  and  in  SI.  Matthew  (eh.  xxvii  17)  that  the  proposal  is  made  by 
Pilate.  All.  however, seems  made  clear  by  the  narrative  of  St  .Mark  (ch.  <tv. 
8),  who  represents  the  people  as  making  the  request  in  general  terms,  and  1'ilatu 
a-  a\  ailing  himself  of  it  in  the  present  emergency  of  this  particular  case. 


312  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.VII. 

now  reminded  him  of  a  custom,  not  improbably  instituted 

by  himself  or  his  predecessors,1  which  offered  a  ready  mode 

of  subterfuge,  —  he  will  offer  to  release  to  them  one  of  two, 

the  seditious  and  blood-stained  robber  Barab- 

Luke  xxiii.  19.  .  0 

bas,-  or  Jesus  who  was  called,  and  whom  but 
lately  so  many  of  those  present  had  triumphantly  hailed 
as  the  Christ.  The  choice  cannot  be  doubtful.  Meanwhile 
he  will  ascend  his  tribunal  formally  to  accept  and  formally 
to  ratify  the  judgment   of  the  popular  voice.     Unhappy 

man  !    No  sooner  has  he  taken  his  seat3  than 

Matt,  xxvii.  19.  .  „ 

a  fresh  appeal  comes  to  him  in  the  form  of 
a  message  from   his  mysteriously  warned  wife,4  bidding 


1  The  origin  of  the  custom  here  alluded  to  is  wholly  unknown.  If  Luke  xxiii. 
17  were  an  unquestioned  reading,  it  might  seem  as  if  it  were  some  ancient  (Jew- 
ish) custom  (compare  John  xxviii.  39)  to  which  the  procurator  was  practically 
obliged  (b.vayK7}v  elx^f)  to  adhere.  As,  however,  the  verse  has  some  appearance 
of  being  a  gloss,  and  as  the  other  Evangelists  seem  to  refer  the  custom  to  the 
Tfyefidiv  (Matt,  xxvii.  15),  or  to  Pilate  personally  (Mark  xv.  6,  8;  comp.  John 
xviii.  39),  we  may  perhaps  best  consider  it  as  due  to  the  shrewd  Roman  policy 
of  one  of  the  early  procurators,  by  which  a  not  unusual  pagan  custom  (see 
Winer,  11WB.  Vol.  ii.  p.  202,  ed.  3)  was  adopted  as  a  contribution  to  the  general 
festivities  and  solemnities  of  the  Passover.  Compare  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  33, 
and,  for  general  information  on  the  subject,  Bynasus,  de  Morte  Chr.  ill.  3,  Vol. 
iii.  p.  57  sq.,  and  the  copious  reff.  in  Ilofmann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  83,  p.  300. 

2  Nothing  more  is  known  of  this  insurgent  than  is  specified  in  the  Gospels. 
From  them  we  learn  that  his  seditious  movements  took  place  in  Jerusalem  (Luke 
xxiii.  19),  that  he  had  comrades  in  his  undertaking  (Mark  xv.  7),  and  had  also 
acquired  some  notoriety  (Matt,  xxvii.  16).  The  reading  which  makes  the  name 
to  have  been  Jesus  Barabbas  is  adopted  by  Ewald,  Meyer  and  others,  but  has 
very  far  from  sufficient  external  support,  and  is  now  rightly  rejected  by  Teschen- 
dorf in  his  last  edition.    See  Vol.  i.  p.  154. 

8  Compare  Matt,  xxvii.  19,  /cad^eVou  Se  avrov  eirl  tov  /S^aroj.  This  )3r}jua 
was  a  portable  tribunal  which  was  placed  where  the  magistrate  might  direct, 
and  from  which  judgment  was  formally  and  finally  delivered.  In  the  present 
case,  as  we  learn  from  St.  John  (ch.  xix.  13),  it  was  erected  on  a  (tessellated) 
pavement,  the  position  of  which  is  unknown,  but  which  was  called  in  Greek 
AidoarpooTOv  and  in  Hebrew  (probably  from  the  slight  ridge  [2J]  on  which  it 
may  have  been  laid)  Gabbatha,  and  perhaps  formed  the  front  of  the  procura- 
tor's residence.  See  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  31,  p.  105,  Winer,  B  WB.  Art.  "Lithos- 
troton,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  29. 

*  According  to  tradition,  her  name  was  Procla,  or  Claudia  Procula,  and  her 
sympathies  Jewish.  See  Evang.  Kicod.  cap.  2,  and  the  good  comments  of  Ilof- 
mann, Leben  .Jesu,  §  79,  p.  340  sq.  The  dream,  which  is  specified  by  the  Evangel- 
ist as  of  a  disturbing  or  harrowing  nature  (TvoWa  iTradov,  Matt,  xxvii.  19),  may 
well  bo  supposed,  with  some  of  the  early  expositors,  to  have  been  divinely  sent, 
though  this  need  not  preclude  the  further  supposition  that  the  woman  had  pre- 


Lect.VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  313 

him  not  to  condemn  the  Just  One  who  stands  before  him. 
But  the  agents  of  the  priestly  party  are  doing  their  work. 
Many  a  fiendish  whisper  is  running  through 
the  crowd  that  the  Nazarene  was  a  blas- 
phemer, yea,  a  blasphemer  in  the  face  of  the  elderhood  of 
Israel,  one  who  had  claimed  the  incommunicable  attributes 
of  Jehovah,  and  who  Jehovah's  word  had  said  must  expi- 
ate   His    profanity   bv   His    blood.     It   was 

Lev.  xxiv.  16. 

enough ;    the  worst   passions    of    the  rabble 
multitude  were  now  stirred  up ; "  the  question  is  no  sooner 
formally  proposed  than  the  answer  is  returned  with  a  fear- 
ful unanimity  —  "  Not  this  man,  but  Barab- 
bas."      The  astounded  procurator  for  a  mo- 

1  Luke  xxm.  22. 

ment  tries  to  reason  with  them,  but  now  it  is 

all  in  vain.     The  rabble  and  their  satanic  instigators  press 

their  advantage ;    wild  voices  are  heard  on 

.  .  Ver.  23. 

every  side;  tumult  is  imminent;  the  un- 
happy and  unrighteous  judge  gives  way,  and,  by  an  act 
which  was  probably  as  fully  understood2  as  it  was  con- 
temptuously disregarded,  strives  to  transfer  the  guilt  of 
innocent  blood  to  the  infuriate  throng  around  him.  Fear- 
fully and  frantically  they  accept  it,  but  their 
end  is  now  gained:  Barabbas  is  set  free;: 
the  holy  Jesus  is  given  up  to  their  will. 


viously  heard  of  our  Lord,  and  was  now  more  than  ever  impressed  with  a  feeling 
of  His  holiness  and  innocence.  Most  expositors  here  rightly  call  attention  to 
the  feci  that  former  laws  by  which  Roman  magistrates  might  have  been  pro- 
hibited  from  taking  their  wives  with  them  were  not  now  observed.  See  esp. 
Tacit  Annal.  in.  33,  34,  and  compare  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  vi.  56,  Vol.  iii.  p.  507. 

1  The  strong  word  ai/ecraaav  (Mark  xv.  11)  seems  to  show  the  determined  way 
in  which  the  priestly  party  were  now  endeavoring  to  turn  the  current  of  popu- 
lar feeling  against  our  Lord.  It  was  in  consequence  of  this  that  we  have  that 
tutored  unanimity  of  clamor  which  is  specially  noticed  by  three  of  the  Evangel- 
ists.   Comp.  .Matt.  x.\\  ii.  22,  Luke  xxiii.  18,  John  xviii.  40. 

1  It  has  been  doubted  whether  Pilate,  in  washing  his  hands  (according  to  the 
apocryphal  Evang,  Nicodemi,  cap.  8,  "  before  the  sun  ''),  was  following  a  heathen 
or  a  Jewish  custom.  The  latter  view,  which  is  that  adopted  by  the  sensible  com- 
mentator Kut  li\  iniiis.  Minis,  on  the  whole,  most  probable.  See  Deut.  xxi.  6,  and 
comp.  Thilo,  Cod.  dpoer.  p.  573  sq.,  Hofmann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  83,  p.  361. 

3  It  has  been  thought  by  some  modern  writers  (Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  Vol.  iii.  p. 
602,  Wratislaw,  Strut,  ami  Dissert,  p.  8)  that  this  has  an  antitypical  reference  to 

27 


Matt,  xocvii.  25. 


314  THE  LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VIL 

Now  followed  the  scourging,  preliminary  to  crucifixion, 
the  crown  of  thorns,1  the  scarlet  robe,2  and 
Lord,-  renewed  e/-     all  the  horrible  mockery  of  the  brutal  sol- 
'  ZiarlJ.is6.'         cbery,  the  Gentile  counterpart  of  the  appall- 
^r^!^'sq'     'mS   scenes    of    fiendish    derision   in    which 
Jews    had    taken   part    scarcely   two   hours 
before.     The  heart  of  the  hapless  Pilate  was  perhaps  in 
some   degree   touched;    and,  judging  from  what  even  a 
Roman  could  feel   for  one  of  the  stubborn  nation  over 
which  he  ruled,  he  strove  to  make  one  last  appeal  to  the 
wild  Jewish  multitude  without,3  by  showing  to  them,  with 
the  garb  of  mockery  flung  around  that  lacerated  and  bleed- 
ing form,  the  man  —  the  man  of  their  own 

John  xix.  5.  . 

race  and  nation,  whom  they  had  given  up  to 

such  sufferings  and  such  shame.    But  even  this  last  appeal 

Ver  was  utterly  in  vain.    Nay,  worse  than  in  vain. 

comp.  Lev. xxiv.     That  pity -moving  sight  only  calls  from  the 

priestly   party   fresh   outbursts   of  ferocity ; 

the  charge  is  only  the  more  vehemently  repeated :    "  By 

the  ceremony  of  the  scapegoat.  This  seems  in  itself  in  a  high  degree  doubtful, 
and  that  more  especially  as  the  ancient  interpreters  all  rightly  consider  the  two 
goats  as  both  typifying  Christ,  the  one  in  His  death,  the  other  in  His  resurrec- 
tion. See  Barnab.  Epist.  cap.  7,  Ephrem.  Syr.  in  Lev.  xvi.  20,  Vol.  i.  p.  244  sq. 
(Ilornas,  1737). 

1  The  question  of  the  exact  species  of  the  thorn  it  is  not  here  necessary  to 
discuss;  the  rhamnus  nabeca  (Hasselquist)  and  the  lycium  spinosum  (Sieber) 
have  both  been  specified  by  competent  observers  as  not  unfitted  for  the  purpose; 
but  of  these  the  latter  seems  the  more  probable.  See  Friedl.,  Archdol.  §  34,  p.  119, 
Hofmann,  Leben  Jesu,  §  84,  p.  373.  As  mockery  seems  to  have  been  the  primary 
object  (t£  oTztpavta  tojv  aKavSuv  KaSrvfipi^ov,  Chiys.),  the  choice  of  the 
plant  was  not  suggested  by  the  sharpness  of  its  thorns;  the  soldiers  took  what 
first  came  to  hand,  utterly  careless  whether  it  was  likely  to  inflict  pain  or  no. 

2  The  robe  appears  to  have  been  the  usual  cloak  of  scarlet  cloth  worn  both  by 
the  common  soldiers  and  those  in  command.  In  the  latter  case  it  was  longer 
and  of  better  wool.  See  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  34,  p.  118,  and  comp.  Winer,  li  WB. 
Art.  "  Kleider,"  Vol.  i.  p.  664. 

3  Though  Pilate  appears  to  have  sanctioned,  or,  to  say  the  very  least,  failed  to 
interfere  with  the  mockery  and  indeed  brutalities  (John  xix.  3)  of  the  soldiers, 
he  is  still  rightly  considered  by  the  older  expositors  to  have  here  made  an  effort 
to  arouse  some  feelings  of  pity  in  the  priests  and  people.  See  Lange,  Leben  Jesu, 
II.  7.  7,  Part  u.  p.  1525.  The  ?5e  6  &vSpunros  (ver.  5)  was  thus  said  in  a  tone  of 
commiseration,  and  certainly  without  any  of  the  bitterness  which  seems  plainly 
to  mark  the  Jf5e  u  f}ao-i\evs  vp.a>i/  of  ver.  14.  Compare  Luthardt,  das  Johann. 
Ecang.  Part  n.  p.  413. 


Lect.  VII.  THE    LAST   PASSOVER.  315 

our  law  ought  He   to  die,"  because  "He   made  Himself 
the   Son   of  God."     The  Son  of  God !     That   title  spake 
with  strange  significance  to  one  pagan  heart 
in  that  vast  concourse.     The  awed1  and  now       „ 

J  er.  9. 

unnerved  procurator  again  returns  into  his 
palace  to  question  the  Holy  Sufferer,  and  comes  forth 
again,  yet  once  more  to  make  a  last  effort  to  save  one 
whose  mysterious2  words  had  now  strangely  moved  his 
very  inmost  saul.  What  a  moment  for  that  hapless  pagan  ! 
One  expression  of  an  honest  and  bold  determination  to 
take  a  responsibility  on  himself  from  which  no  Roman 
magistrate  ought  ever  to  have  shrunk,  one  righteous 
resolve  to  follow  the  dictates  of  his  conscience,  and  the 
name  of  Pilate  would  never  have  held  its  melancholy 
place  in  the  Christian's  creed  as  that  of  the  irresolute  and 
unjust  judge,  who,  against  his  own  most  solemn  convic- 
tions, gave  up  to  a  death  of  agony  and  shame  one  whom 
he  knew  to  be  innocent,  and  even  dimly  felt  to  be  divine.3 

1  The  fear  which  Tilate  now  felt,  even  more  than  before  (/.iuWov  tcpofiri&r], 
Julm  xix.  S),  when  be  beard  that  our  Lord  had  represented  Himself  as  vlos  Qeov, 
w.mki  naturally  arise  from  bis  conceiving  such  a  title  to  imply  a  divine  descent 
or  parentage,  which  the  analogy  of  the  heroes  and  demigods  of  ancient  story 
might  predispose  him  to  believe  possible  in  the  present  case.  Comp.  Lnthardt, 
Johann.  Evang.  Part  ii.  p.  405.  The  message  from  his  wife  might  have  already 
aroused  some  apprehensions;  these  the  present  declaration  greatly  augments. 
'I  lie  unjust  judge  begins  to  tear  he  may  be  braving  the  wrath  of  some  unknown 
deity,  and  now  anxiously  puts  the  question  ir6~Aev  fl  av  (ver.  9),  "Was  llis 
descent  indeed  such  as  the  mysterious  title  might  be  understood  to  imply?  "  To 
this  the  accuse  (ver.  11)  forms,  and  probably  was  felt  by  Pilate  to  form,  a  kind 
of  indirect  answer.  See  Slier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  301  Bq.  (Clark), 
where  the  last  question  is  well  explained.  Compare  Lange,  LebenJesu,  u.  ~.  7, 
Pari  in.  p.  1627. 

2  The  difficult  words  5ia  tovto  6  irapafiiSovs  /ue  <toi  k.  t.  A.  (John  xix.  11), 
which  the  Evangelist  notices  as  having  still  more  caused  [in  toutov  40jTfi) 
Tilate  to  renew  his  efforts,  appear  to  refer  to  Caiaphas  as  the  official  representa- 
tive of  those  who  formally  (jave  over  our  Lord  to  the  Roman  governor  (Matt. 
xxvii.  'I,  Mark  xv.  1),  and  to  imply  that  his  guilt  was  greater,  because,  when  he 
had  do  power  granted  him  from  above  against  our  Lord,  be  gave  the  Lord  up  to 
one  who  had,  and  whose  power  was  plenary.  In  a  word,  Tilate,  the  instrument 
in  God'fl  hand-,  the  bearer  of  the  sword,  is  guilty  because  he  acts  against  his 
convictions,  hut  he  who  gave  up  the  Lord  to  this  hearer  of  the  sword  is  more 
guilty,  because  he  knew  what  he  was  doing,  and  was  acting  against  clearer 
knowledge  and  fuller  light. 

;;  The  character  of  Pilate,  though  often  discussed,  has  not  always  been  correctly 


316  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

But  that  word  was  never  spoken.  Cries  now  smote  upon 
Pilate's  ears,  at  which  every  previous  impression  was  for- 
gotten. Instinctive  sense  of  justice,  convictions,  preposses- 
sions, apprehensions,  were  all  swallowed  up  in  an  instnnt, 
when  he  heard  himself  denounced  before  the  multitude, 
before  the  Sanhedrin,  and  before  his  own  soldiers  as  "  no 
friend  to  Caesar  " *  if  he  let  go  one  who  by  His  assumptions 
had  practically  spoken  against  that  dreaded  name.  "  No 
friend  to  Ca3sar!"     Already  irt   imagination 

John  xix.  12.  .      J  .  f 

the  wretched  man  saw  himself  in  the  pres- 
ence of  his  gloomy  and  suspicious  master,  informed  against, 
condemned,  degraded,  banished.2  It  was  enough  ;  Pilate 
must  not  come  to  this  dishonor;  the  Galilaean  must  die; 
it  remains  only  to  pronounce  the  sentence.     The  Roman 


estimated.  The  fair  statement  seems  to  be  that  lie  was  a  thorough  and  complete 
type  of  the  later  Roman  man  of  the  world.  Stern,  but  not  relentless  (see  Fried- 
lieb,  ArchdoL  §  34,  p.  122),  shrewd  and  world-worn,  prompt  and  practical, 
haughtily  just,  and  yet,  as  the  early  writers  correctly  perceived,  self-seeking  and 
cowardly  (avavSpos  acpoSpa,  Chrys.;  comp.  Const.  Apost.  v.  14),  able  to  perceive 
what  was  right,  but  without  moral  strength  to  follow  it  out.  —  the  sixth  procu- 
rator of  Judaea  stands  forth  a  sad  and  terrible  instance  of  a  man  whom  the  fear 
of  endangered  self-interest  drove  not  only  to  act  against  the  deliberate  convic- 
tions of  his  heart  and  his  conscience,  but  further  to  commit  an  act  of  the  utmost 
cruelty  and  injustice,  even  after  those  convictions  had  been  deepened  by  warn- 
ings and  strengthened  by  presentiment.  Compare  Niemeyer,  Charakt.  Vol.  i. 
p.  121  sq.,  Luthardt,  Johann.  Eoang.  Part  I.  p.  128  sq.,  Winer,  RWB.  Art. 
"Pilatus,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  262,  and  for  references  to  various  treatises  on  this  subject, 
Hase,  Leben  Jesu,  §  117,  p.  198. 

1  See  John  xix.  12,  ovk  e7  (plAos  tow  Kalcrapos.  This  appellation  was  probably 
not  here  used  in  its  formal  and  semi-omcial  sense,  "amicus  Ca?saris"  (Sepp, 
Leben  Clir.  vi.  60,  Vol.  iii.  p.  519),  but  in  its  more  simple  meaning  of  "  friendly 
and  true  to  the  interests  of  Cassar."  The  concluding  words  iras  6  /HatriAta 
k.  t.  A.  must  also  have  had  their  full  effect  on  the  procurator,  who  probably 
knew  full  well  how  truly  in  those  times  "majestatis  crimen  omnium  accusatio- 
num  complementum  erat."  —  Tacit.  Anna!,  in.  38. 

2  All  that  the  unhappy  man  was  now  probably  dreading  in  imagination 
finally  came  upon  him.  On  the  complaint  of  some  Samaritans,  Vitellius.  the 
President  of  Syria,  sent  his  friend  Marcellus  to  administer  the  affairs  of  Juda?a, 
and  ordered  Pilate  to  go  to  Rome  to  answer  the  charges  preferred  against  him. 
See  Joseph.  Antiq.  xvm.  4.  2.  This  deposition  appear  to  have  taken  place  in 
the  lifetime  of  Tiberius  (see  Winer,  RWB.  Art.  "  Pilatus,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  261),  and 
about  Easter,  a.  d.  36.  The  sequel  is  said  to  have  been  disgrace  and  misfortunes 
(Euseb.),  and,  not  long  afterwards,  death  by  his  own  hand.  See  Euseb.  Hist. 
Err/,  ii.  7.  For  a  good  account  of  his  political  life,  see  Ewald,  GescJi.  Christus\ 
p.  30  sq. 


Lect.  VII.         THE  LAST  PASSOVER.  ol7 

again  ascends  the  tribunal,  now  determined,  yet  with  words 
of  jibing    bitterness   towards   his   tempters, 

■»  O  .  ...  John  xix.  15. 

which  show  the  still  enduring  struggle  in  his 

unhappy  soul ;  but  again  tbe  ominous  rejoinder  "We  have 

no    king   but    Caesar,"    and    the    struggle   is 

°  lb. 

ended.      The    sentence    is   pronounced,   and 
the  Saviour  is  led  forth  to  Golgotha.1 

On  that  concluding  scene  our  words  must  be  guarded 
and  few.     The  last  sufferings  of  the  Eternal 

„  -i  •  r  t  j.i  i  TlIE  Cbucifix- 

Son    are   no   meet    subject    ior    lengthened     I0J,. 
description,  however  solemn  and  reverential 
be  the  language  in  which  it  is  attempted  to  be  conveyed. 
Let  us  then  presume  only  with  all  brevity  to  illustrate  the 
outward  connection  of  events  which  the  inspired  writers 
have  been  moved  to  record.     The  chief  priests  and  scribes 
now  at  length  have  Him  for  whose  blood  they  were  thirst- 
ing formally  delivered  over  into  their  mur- 
derous hands.     "With  the  aid  of  the  Roman       „.'_„„ 

Matt,  xxvu.  31. 

soldiery,2  who  had  now  removed  from  Him 
the  garb  of  mockery,  they  lead  the  Saviour  without  the 
gate  to  a  spot  of  slightly  rising  ground,  known  by  a  name 
which  the  shape  of  the  rounded  summit  may  perhaps  have 

1  Into  the  difficult  questions  relating  to  the  site  of  this  place  we  cannot  here 
enter  further  than  to  remark  (a)  that  the  name  (Chald.  KhVa  -.?)  's  perhaps 
more  plausibly  understood  as  referring  to  the  general  form  of  the  place  (Cyril  of 
Jerus.,  a!.)  —  possibly  a  low,  rounded,  bare  hill  (Ewald,  Gcsch.  Clir.  p.  404)  —  than 
to  the  skulls  of  the  criminals  executed  there  (Jerome,  al);  ('<)  that  it  ajipears  to 
hare  been  in  the  vicinity  of  some  thoroughfare  (Matt,  xxvii.  39),  and  lastly,  (c), 
— if  it  he  not  presumptuous  to  express  an  opinion  on  a  question  of  such  extreme 
difficulty,  —  that  the  arguments  in  favor  of  its  proximity  (at  any  rate)  to  the 
present  traditional  site  appear  to  preponderate.  See,  on  the  one  hand,  the  able 
arguments  of  Williams,  Holy  City,  Vol.  ii.  p.  13  sq.,  and,  on  the  other,  Robinson, 
Palestine,  Vol.  i.  p.  407  sq.,  to  which  add  an  article  by  Ferguson  in  Smith,  Diet. 
<</  Bibli .  Vol.  i.  p.  1017  sq.  The  nearness  of  the  assumed  site  to  that  of  Herod's 
palace  is  a  fact  of  some  importance. 

-'  In  John  xix.  17  sq.  the  grammatical  subject  would  seem  to  he  the  same  as 
the  avTois  of  the  preceding  verse,  i.  e.,  the  apx'eP€<*  ver.  lu.  The  soldiers  seem 
first  specially  mentioned  ver.  23,  but,  from  the  distinctly  specified  ore  i<TTavi><x>- 
oav  (ib.)  and  the  statements  of  the  other  Evangelists,  were  obviously  throughout 
the  instruments  by  which  the  sentence  was  carried  out.  The  party  of  the  San- 
hedrin  are  bowerer  still  clearly  put  forward  as  tbe  leading  actors :  tlt>ycruci- 
ti.  d  mil-  Lord  (John  xix.  IS,  Acts  v.  80);  Soman  hands  drove  in  the  nails. 

•  '7* 


318  THE  LAST  PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

suggested  —  Golgotha,  or  the  place  of  a  skull.  Ere,  how- 
ever, they  arrive  there,  two  touching  incidents  are  specified 
by  the  Evangelists  —  the  unrestrained  lamentation  and 
weeping  of  the  women1  that  formed  part  of  the  vast  attend- 
ant multitude,  and  the  substitution  of  Simon  of  Cyrene  2 
as  bearer  of  the  cross  in  the  place  of  the  now  exhausted 
Redeemer.  The  low  hill  is  soon  reached  ;  the  cross  is  fixed  ; 
the  stupefying  drink  is  offered  and  refused  ;  ruthless  hands 

strip  away  the  garments;3  the  holy  and  lace- 
a  .xp,i  rated   body  is   raised  aloft;   the   hands   are 

nailed  to  the  transverse  beam ;  the  feet  are 
separately  nailed4  to  the  lower  part  of  the  upright  beam ; 
the  bitterly  worded  accusation  is  fixed  up  above  the  sacred 


1  This  incident  is  only  specified  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  xxiii.  27  sq.),  who,  as  we  have 
already  had  occasion  to  remark,  mentions  the  ministrations  of  women  more 
frequently  than  any  of  the  other  Evangelists.    See  Lect.  i.  p.  43,  note  2. 

2  He  is  said,  both  by  St.  Mark  (ch.  xv.  21)  and  St.  Luke  (ch.  xxiii.  26),  to  have 
now  been  ipx^^vos  a.irb  aypov,  —  a  comment  which  may  perhaps  imply  that  he 
had  been  laboring  there,  and  was  now  returning  ("onustus  ligno,''  Lightfoot, 
Hor.  Hebr.  in  Marc.  I.  c),  some  time  before  the  hour  when  (if  the  day  was  the 
irapaa Kzv))  rod  ndcrxa)  servile  work  would  commonly  cease.  Comp.  Friedlieb, 
Archdol.  §  17,  p.  41.  If  this  be  the  meaning  of  the  words,  they  may  be  urged  as 
supplying  a  subsidiary  proof  that  the  day  was  Nisan  14,  and  not  Nisan  15.  See 
p.  291,  note  2,  where  this  and  a  few  similar  passages  are  briefly  specified. 

3  See  Matt,  xxvii.  35,  Mark  xv.  24,  Luke  xxiii.  34,  John  xix.  23.  None  of 
these  passages  are  opposed  to  the  ancient  belief  that  a  linen  cloth  was  bound 
round  the  sacred  loins,  as  the  apocryphal  Evang.  Nicodemi  (cap.  10)  cursorily, 
and  so  perhaps  with  a  greater  probability  of  truth,  mentions  in  its  narrative  of 
the  crucifixion.  What  we  know  of  the  prevailing  custom  has  been  thought  to 
imply  the  contrary  (see  Lipsius,  de  Cruce,  n.  7);  still,  as  this  is  by  no  means 
certain,  the  undoubted  antiquity  of  the  apocryphal  writing  to  which  we  have 
referred  may  justly  be  allowed  to  have  some  weight.  See  Hofmann,  Leben 
Jesu,  §  84,  p.  373,  and  compare  Hug,  Frieb.  Zeitschr.  vn.  p.  161  sq.  (cited  by 
Winer). 

4  This  is  a  very  debated  point.  The  arguments,  however,  in  favor  of  the 
opinion  advanced  in  the  text,  viz.,  that  not  three  (Nonnus,  p.  176,  ed.  Fassow) 
but  four  nails  were  used,  seem  perhaps  distinctly  to  preponderate.  See  Friedlieb, 
Archdol.  §  41,  p.  144  sq.,  Hofmann,  Leben  Jesu,  p.  375.  The  attempt  to  show  that 
it  is  doubtful  even  whether  the  feet  were  nailed  at  all  (comp.  Winer,  de  Pedum 
Affixione,  Lips.  1845,  and  R  WB.  Vol.  i.  p.  678),  must  be  pronounced  plainly  futile, 
and  is  well  disposed  of  by  Meyer,  Komment.  ub.  Matt,  xxvii.  35,  p.  533  sq.  For 
a  full  account  of  the  form  of  the  cross,  which,  in  the  present  case,  owing  to  the 
ti'tAos  fixed  thereon  (John  xix.  19),  was  probably  that  of  the  crux  immissa  ( -f ), 
not  of  the  crux  commissa  ( "J"), see  esp. Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  36,  p.  130;  and  for 
the  assertion  that  the  holy  body  was  raised,  and  then  nailed,  ib.  §  41,  pp.  142, 
144. 


Lect.VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  319 

head ;    the  soldiers  divide  up  rind  cast  lots  for  the  gar- 
ments, and   then,  as  St.  Matthew  has  paused 
to  specify,  sit  watching,  the  stolid,  impassive 
spectators  of  their  fearful  and  now  completed  work. 

It  was  now,  as  we  learn  from  St.  Mark,  about  the  third 
hour,1  and  to  the  interval  between  this  and 
mid-day  must  we  assign  the  mockeries  of  the     t^Zldtoth/Zvi 
passers-by,  the  brutalities  of  the  soldiery,  and     Aou,r- 
the  display  of  inhuman  malignity  on  the  part       jfoa.xawn.8ft 
of  the  members  of  the  Sanhedrin,  who  now       Matt.xxva.iL 
were  striving,  chief  priests  and  elders  of  Is- 
rael as  they  were,  by  every  fiendish  taunt  and  jibe  to  add 
to  the  agonies  of  the  crucified  Lord,  when 
even,  as  it  would  seem,  the  rude  multitude     J*** **»****• 
stood  around  in  wistful  and  perhaps  commis- 
erating silence.     To  the  same  period  also  must  we  refer 
the  narrative  of  the  mercy  extended  to  the 
penitent  malefactor,  and  St.  John's  affectin<r       ,         _ 

r  '  °  Ch.  xix.  2G. 

notice  of  our  Lord's  tender  care  for  the  for- 
lorn Virgin  mother,  who,  with  her  sister2  and  the  faitli- 


1  This,  again,  is  a  doubtful  point,  owing  to  the  distinct  statement  of  St.  John, 
who  specifies  it  as  wpa  ws  sVttj  (ch.  xix.  14).  As  the  supposition  that  the  fourth 
Evangelist  here  was  reckoning  from  midnight  (comp.  Wieseler,  Citron.  Synops. 
p.  410  sq.,  Greswell,  Dissert,  xlii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  229)  does  not  seem  satisfactorily 
made  out,  and  the  old  assumption  of  an  erratum  (s-'  for  J  ;  compare  Alford,  in 
loc.)  extremely  precarious,  we  must  either  leave  the  difference  as  we  find  it,  or, 
what  is  not  unreasonable,  suppose  that  the  hour  of  crucifixion  was  somewhere 
between  the  two  broad  divisions,  the  third  and  sixth  hours,  and  that  the  one 
Evangelist  specified  the  hither,  the  other  the  farther  terminus. 

2  It  has  recently  been  considered  doubtful  whether  three  or  four  women  are 
here  specified;  i.  e.,  whether  the  sister  of  the  blessed  Virgin  is  to  be  regarded  as 
identical  with  the  wife  of  Clopas,  or  whether  we  have  in  fact  two  pairs,  Mary 
and  her  sister,  Mary  the  wife  of  Clopas,  and  Mary  Magdalene.  The  latter  opinion 
has  been  maintained  by  Wieseler  {Stud.  it.  Krit.  for  1840,  p.  048  sq.)  and  adopted 
by  Lange  [Leben  Jesu,  Part  it.  p.  1558),  Ewald  [Gesch.  Chr.  p.  438).  Meyer  [in 
loc),  and  others,  but  on  grounds  that  seem  wholly  insufficient  to  overcome  (a) 
the  improbability  thai  the  Bister  of  the  Virgin  should  have  been  thus  vaguely 
mentioned  in  a  passage  which  appears  studiedly  explicit  and  distinct,  and  (b)  the 
improbability  arising  from  the  general  style  of  St.  John  that  Kal  should  have 
been  omitted  (the  Byr.-Pesh.  inserts  it),  and  the  women  thus  enumerated  in  pairs. 
Contrast  John  ii.  12.  where  we  might  have  almost  expected  such  a  separation, 

and  rh.  xxi.  2.     Wieseler  i reives  the  unnamed  a5eA<f>7)  to  have  been  Salome, 

ami  Ueyer  finds  in  the  passage  a  trace  of  the  Apostle's  peculiarity  not  directly 


320  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

ful  Mary  of  Magdala,  was  remaining  up  to  this  fearful 
hour  nigh  to  the  Redeemer's  cross,  but  who  now,  it  would 
seem,  yielded  to  what  she  might  have  either  inferred  or 
perceived  was  the  desire  of  her  Lord,  and  was  led  away  by 
the  beloved  Apostle.1 

But  could  all  these  scenes  of  agony  and  woe  thus  fear- 
fully succeed  each  other,  and  nature  remain 
/*TLt5rZ     impassive   and   unmoved?     The   sixth   hour 

the  ninth  how.  nQW  ha(J  come#       \yas  tliere  to  K,e  nQ  outWard 

•     Matt,  xxv'u.  45.  .  •    •  i  i        ,     t  i  -i  ->     i 

Markxv.sa.  sign,  no  visible  token  that  earth  and  heaven 

were  sympathizing  in  the  agonies  of  Him  by 
whose  hands  they  had  been  made  and  fashioned  ?  No,  ver- 
ily, it  could  not  be.     If  one  Evangelist,  as  we  have  already 
„    .  observed,  tells  us  that  on   the  nio;ht  of  the 

Led.  II.  p.  70.  /  & 

Matt.xami.4s.       Lord's  birth  a  heavenly  brightness  and  glory 

Lu'ke^iiT'u         shone  forth  amid  the  gloom,  three  inspired 

witnesses  now  tell  us  that  a  pall  of  darkness 

was  spread  over  the  whole  land2  from  the  sixth  to  the 

to  name  himself  or  his  kindred ;  but  as  ch.  i.  42  (where  Meyer  asserts  that  James 
was  then  called  though  not  mentioned)  proves  utterly  nothing,  and  ch.  xxi.  2 
proves  the  contrary,  we  seem  to  have  full  reason  for  adhering  to  the  usual  ac- 
ceptation of  the  passage,  and  for  believing  that  the  sister  of  the  Virgin  was  the 
wife  of  Clopas.  See  Luthardt,  das  Johann.  Evang.  Tart  II.  p.  419,  Ebrard, 
Kritih  der  Evang.  Gesch.  §  108,  p.  555. 

1  This  seems  a  reasonable  inference  from  John  xix.  27,  the  air'  tKtivns  wpas 
appearing  to  mark  that  the  apostle  at  once  and  on  the  spot  manifested  his  lov- 
ing obedience  by  leading  away  the  Virgin  mother  to  his  own  home.  After  this 
(lUSTci  tovto,  ver.  28),  and  during  the  three-hour  interval  of  darkness,  the  apos- 
tle would  have  returned,  and  thus  have  been  the  witness  of  what  he  has  re- 
corded, ver.  28  sq.  In  confirmation  of  this  view,  it  may  be  noticed  that  among 
the  women  specified  as  beholding  afar  off  (Matt,  xxvii.  56,  Mark  xv.  40)  the  Vir- 
gin is  not  mentioned.  Compare  Greswell,  Dissert,  xlii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  249,  Stier, 
Disc,  of  our  Lord,Yo\.  vii.  p.  479  (Clark). 

2  This  darkness,  as  now  seems  properly  admitted  by  all  the  best  expositors, 
was  neither  due  to  any  species  of  eclipse,  nor  to  the  deepened  gloom  which  in 
some  cases  precedes  an  earthquake  (comp.  Milman,  Hist,  of  Chr.  Vol.  i.  363),  but 
was  strictly  supernatural,  —  the  appointed  testimony  of  sympathizing  nature. 
"Yea.  creation  itself,"  as  it  has  been  well  said,  "bewailed  its  Lord,  for  the  sun 
was  darkened,  and  the  rocks  were  rent."  —  Cyril  Alex.  Comment,  on  St.  Lul:e, 
Serm.  cliii.  Part  n.  p.  722.  where  reference  is  made  to  Amos  (ch.  viii.  9,  not  v.  8) 
:is  having  foretold  it.  Compare  Bauer,  de  Mirac.  obscurati  so/is.  Wittenb.  1741. 
External  heathen  testimony  appears  not  to  have  been  wanting  (see  Tertullian, 
Apologet.  cap.  21),  though,  as  recent  chronologers  have  properly  shown,  the 
constantly-cited  notice  of  the  freedman  Phlegon  (apud  Syncell.  Chronogr.  Vol. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST  PASSOVER.  321 

ninth  hour.  But  while  they  thus  specially  notice  the 
interval,  it  may  be  observed  that  they  maintain  the  most 
solemn  reserve  as  to  the  incidents  by  which  it  was  marked. 
Though  full  and  explicit  as  to  the  circumstances  of  the 
agony  in  the  garden,  they  are  here  profoundly  silent. 
The  mysteries  of  those  hours  of  darkness,  when  with  the 
sufferings  of  the  agonized  body  mingled  the  sufferings  of 
the  sacred  soul,  the  struggles  with  sinking  nature,  the  accu- 
mulating pressure  of  the  burden  of  a  world's  sin,  the  mo- 
mently more  and  more  embittered  foretastings  of  that 
which  was  its  wages  and  its  penalty,  the  clinging  despera- 
tion of  the  last  assaults  of  Satan  and  his  mustered  hosts,1 
the  withdrawal  and  darkening  of  the  Paternal  presence, — 
mysteries  such  as  these,  so  deep  and  so  dread,  it  was  not 
meet  that  even  the  tongues  of  Apostles  should  be  moved 
to  speak  of,  or  the  pens  of  Evangelists  to  record.  Nay, 
the  very  outward  eye  of  man  might  now  gaze  no  further. 
All  man  might  know  was  by  the  hearing  of  the  ear.  One 
loud  cry  revealed  all,  and  more  than  all,  that  it  is  possible 
for  our  nature  to  conceive,  —  one  loud  cry  of  unfathom- 
able woe  and  uttermost  desolation, 2  and  yet,  even  as  its 
very  accents  imply,  of  achieved  and  consummated  victory. 

i.  p.  014,  ed.  Bonn)  lias  no  reference  to  the  present  miracle,  but  to  an  ordinary 
eclipse  the  year  before.  See  Ideler,  Handb.  der  ( %ronol.  Vol.  ii.  p.  427,  Wieseler, 
Clirmi.  Synops.  p.  3S8. 

1  1 1  is  worthy  of  consideration  whether  the  important  and  difficult  passage, 
Col.  ii.  16,  may  not  have  eotlte  reference  to  this  awful  period.  If,  as  now  seems 
grammatically  certain,  airevSuaauefos  is  to  be  taken  in  its  usual  and  proper 

.  maj  iioi  the  "  stripping  off  from  Himself  of  powers  and  principal- 
ities "'  have  stood  in  Borne  connection  as  to  time  with  the  hours  when  the  dj  ing 
but  victorious  Lord,  even  out  of  the  darkness,  called  unto  His  God,  and,  by  His 
holy  surrender  of  Himself  into  the  hands  ui'  His  Eternal  Father,  quelled  satanio 
assaults,  which,  thou  jh  not  recorded,  and  scarcely  hinted  at  (compare,  however, 
Luke  xxii.  63,  and  obscn  e  Luke  i>  .  13),  we  may  still  presume  to  think  would  then 
have  been  made  with  fearfully  renewed  energies.    See  Com.  on  Col.  1.  c.  p.  1C1. 

2  On  the  words  of  our  Lord   here  referred  to  —  which  are  indeed  far  from 
being  "  perhaps  a  phrase  in  common  use  in  extreme  distress,"  as  tfilman  coldly 
terms  them  [Hist,  of  Chr.  Vol.  i.  p  864),  and  which  the  two  inspired  witi 
who  record  them  ha\  e  retained  even  in  the  \  ery  form  and  accents  in  which  they 

esp.  the  thoughtful  comments  of  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord, 
Vol.  \ii.  p.  488  sq  ,  Lange,  Leben  Jenu,  n,  7.  '.'.  Part  m.  p.  1073,  and  compare 
Thesaur.  Theol.  {Crit.  Soar.)  Vol.  ii.  '-'17  Bq. 


322  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

Even  from  the  lowest  depths  of  a  tortured,  tempted,  sin- 
burdened,  and  now  forsaken  humanity  —  even  from  the 
remotest  bound,  as  it  were,  of  a  nature  thus  traversed  to 
its  extremest  limits,1  and  thus  feelingly  realized  in  all  the 
measures  of  its  infirmity  for  man's  salvation,  the  Saviour 
cried  unto  God  as  His  God ;  the  Son  called 

2Iatt.xxvii.A7.  .       Ty  M  l  ,1    •        i  n 

„   ,      „  unto  linn  with  whom,  even  in  this  hour  or 

Mark  xv.  34. 

dereliction   and   abandonment,  lie   felt  and 
knew  that  lie  was  eternally  one ;  yea,  and,  as  the  language 
of  inspiration  has  declared,  He  "  was   heard  in   that  He 
feared."      With  the  utterance  of  that  loud 
cry,  as  we  perhaps  presume  to  infer  from  the 
incidents  that  followed,2  the  clouds  of  darkness  rolled  away 
and  the   light  broke  forth.     If  this  be  so,  the   first  mo- 
ments of  that  returning  light  were  profaned  by  a  mockery 
and  a  malignity  on  which  it  is  fearful  to  dwell.     We  shud- 
der as  we  read  that  the  words  of  that  harrowing  exclama- 
tion—  words  first  spoken  by  the  prophetic 
Psalmist,  and  the  outward  meaning  of  which 
no  Jew  could  r^ossibly  have  misunderstood  —  were  studi- 
ously perverted  by  a  satanic  malice,3  and  that  the  most  holy 


1  Compare  Cyril.  Alex. :  "  He  who  excels  all  created  things,  and  shares  the 
Father's  throne,  humbled  Himself  unto  emptying,  and  took  the  form  of  a  slave, 
and  endured  the  limits  of  human  nature,  that  he  might  fulfil  the  promise  made 
of  God  to  the  forefathers  of  the  Jews."  —  Commentary  on  St.  Luke,  Serm.  cliii. 
Part  ii.  p.  722. 

2  It  seems  most  consistent  with  the  deep  mysteries  of  these  hours  to  conceive 
that  the  darkness  had  not  passed  away  when  the  Lord  uttered  the  opening 
words  of  Tsalm  xxii.  1,  but  that  immediately  afterwards  light  returned.  See 
Slier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  vii.  p.  483  (Clark).  With  the  returning  light 
mockery  would  not  unnaturally  break  forth  anew.  However  this  may  be,  we 
must  certainly  maintain  that  these  words  of  Psalm  xxii.  were  not,  as  asserted 
by  Milman  [Hist,  of  Christianity,  Vol.  i.  p.  364),  our  Lord's  "last  words,"  it 
being  perfectly  clear  from  St.  Matthew  that,  after  the  'EAaii,  'EAcoi,  k.  t.  A., 
our  Lord  uttered  at  least  another  cry  {ird.\iv  Kpd^as,  ch.  xxvii.  50).  The  re- 
ceived opinion  seems  undoubtedly  the  right  one;  according  to  which  the  sixth 
word  from  the  cross  was  TeTeAecrrai  (John  xix.  30),  the  last  words  narep,  tis 
ras  xe^P^s  °~ou  vapaTiZre/xcu  to  Trvevfxa.  f.iov  [compare  7r<xpe5a>icci'  to  nvedfia, 
John  xix.  30],  as  recorded  by  St.  Luke  (ch.  xxiii.  40).  Compare,  if  necessary, 
Slier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  28  (Clark),  Meyer,  «B.  Luk.  p.  498  (ed.  3). 

•"  There  is  no  reason  for  thinking,  with  Euthymius  [in  Matt,  xxvii.  47),  that 
those  who  said  'HAi'ae   (pooi/ei  (Matt.  /.  '•.)  were  Roman  soldiers  (r^v  'E/3pa'i5a 


Lect.  Vn.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER. 

name  of  the  eternal  Father  was  used  by  the  Jewish  repro- 
bates that  stood  around  as  that  wherewith  they  now  dared 
to  make  a  mock  at  the  Eternal  Son.     But  the 
end  had  now  come.     One  solitary  act  of"  in- 

»  Mark  xv.  86. 

stinctive  compassion '  was  yet  to  be  performed ; 
the  sponge  of  vinegar  was  pressed  to  the  parching  lips; 
the  dying  Lord  received  it,  and,  with  a  loud  cry  of  con- 
sciously completed  victory  for  man,  and  of  most  loving 
resignation  unto  God,2  bowed  meekly  His  divine  head  and 
gave  up  the  ghost. 

Jesus   was   dead.      Can    we   marvel,  then,       The  portent*  mat 

,  l^iiii  p  i  j.      fallowed  our  Lord's 

when  we  read  that  the  most  awful  moment     death. 

in  the  history  of  the  world  was   marked  by       Mf:xxoitBl' 

•>  J  Mark-  XV.  38. 

mighty  and  significant  portents?  —  that  the       Xatt.xxvii.tt. 

veil  that  symbolically  separated  sinful  man 

from  his  offended  God  was  now  rent  in  twain,3  that  the 


<pwvi]u  ayvoovvres),  who  only  caught  the  Found  of  t ho  words  uttered.  There 
was  here  neither  misunderstanding  nor  imperfect  hearing,  but  only  a  mockery, 
which  had  now  become  verily  demoniacal. 

1  This  would  .-(I  ni  to  be  the  correct  statement,  as  we  learn  from  Mark  xv.  86, 
that  the  i ■< >i 1 1-  wretch  joined  in  the  mockery  of  the  rest,  and  yet  must  apparently 
infer  from  Matt.  xxvii.  49  that  his  present  act  was  regarded  as  one  of  mercy 
which  his  companions  Bought  to  restrain.  It  may  l>e  true,  as  has  been  suggested 
by  some  expositors,  that  the  man  was  really  touched  by  the  Saviour's  Buffering, 
now  perhaps  made  more  apparent  by  the  Si^oi  of  John  xix.  28,  and  that  under 
the  cover  of  mockery  he  still  persisted  in  performing  this  last  act  of  compassion. 
At  any  rate,  the  Spa/xwv  (Matt,  xxvii.  48,  Mark  xv.  30)  and  &<pere  (Mark  xv.  3ti, 
not  improbably  "let  me  aloue'')  seem  very  fairly  to  accord  with  such  a  suppo- 
sition. 

'-'  The  remark  of  Draseke  (cited  by  Stier)  is,  perhaps,  not  wholly  fanciful,  that 
the  It  it  finished  was  more  especially  directed  to  men,  as  the  farewell  greeting  to 
earth,  and  that  the  Fattier,  into  thine  hands  was,  as  it  were,  "ilis  eutrancc- 
grecting  to  heaven."  —  Dinr.  of  our  Lard,  Vol.  viii.  p.  28  (Clark). 

3  That  the  veil  of  the  temple  here  Bpecified  was  that  which  separated,  not  the 
holy  place  from  the  rest  of  the  temple  (Hug),  but  the  holy  place  from  the  holy 
of  holies,  si  'ins  most  clearly  shown  not  so  much  by  the  mere  term  used  ('COTa- 
ireTao-fxa  not  KaKv/x/xa;  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  j  47,  p.  172),  as  by  the  authentic 
elucidations  supplied  by  the  inspired  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Bebrews. 
See  oh.  ix.  7  sq.,  x.  20.  The  remark  of  Lightfoot  [Hor.  Hebr.in  Matt,  xxvii.  51) 
that,  according  to  custom,  the  high-priest  entered  on  one  side  of  the  inner  veil, 
may  perhaps  illustrate  the  full  meaning  of  the  sign;  the  veil  now.  as  we  are  dis- 
tinctly  told  by  St.  Luke,  was  rent  in  the  midst  {icrxlcrbri  /Ataou,  ch.  xxiii.  45),  n 
Btatemenl  made  still  more  explicit  by  the  ((rx'^^V  «7r^  avu&tv  ea>s  kutoi  eis  Siio 
of  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxvii.  61) and  St.  Mark  (ch.  xv.  38). 


324  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

earth  quaked,  that  the  rocks  were  rent  and  the  graves 

opened,  and  that  by  the  vivifying   power  of  the   Lord's 

death  they  that  slumbered  therein  arose,  and  after  their 

Saviour's   resurrection   were    seen   by  many   witnesses  ? 1 

Such  things  were  known,   patent,  and  recognized ;   they 

were  seen  by  Jews  and  by  Gentiles ;  by  the  centurion  on 

Golgotha,  and  by  the  priest  in  the  temple ; 

zuhexxiiu 47.        by  the  multitudes  that  now  beat  their  breasts 

Lute xxiu.  is.        jn  amazed  and  unavailing  sorrow,  and  by  the 

Ver.  id.  m  &  . 

women  and  kinsmen  that  stood  gazing  afar 
off;  they  were  believed  in  and  they  stand  recorded ;  yea, 
and  in  spite  of  all  the  negative  criticism  that  the  unbelief 
of  later  days  has  dared  to  bring  against  them,2  they  remain, 
and  will  remain  even  unto  the  end  of  time,  as  the  solemn 

1  Nothing  can  be  more  unwarrantable  than  to  speak  of  this  statement  of  the 
inspired  Evangelist  as  the  mythical  conversion  into  actual  history  of  the  sign  of 
the  rent  graves  (Meyer,  i'tb.  Matt,  xxvii.  52),  nor  less  in  harmony  with  sound 
principles  of  interpretation  than  to  term  these  resurrections  (riy4p£>ri<Tav,  ver.  52) 
visionary  appearances  of  the  spirits  (contrast  7roAAa  adixara,  ver.  52)  of  deceased 
brethren  confined  to  the  minds  of  our  Lord's  followers  (Milman,  Hist,  of  Chr. 
Vol.  i.  p.  365),  when  the  words  of  St.  Matthew  are  so  particularly  definite  and 
explicit.  Compare  ver  52,  53.  We  are  plainly  told  that  at  the  Lord's  death  the 
bodies  of  slumbering  saints  arose  (<p<ev7)  avrovs  fyyetpe,  Chrys.;  but?);  and  we 
are  as  plainly  told,  with  the  addition  of  a  special  and  appropriate  note  of  time, 
that  after  our  Lord's  resurrection  they  entered  into  the  Holy  City  and  were 
seen  there  by  many.  Into  particulars  it  is  unwise  and  precarious  to  enter;  if, 
however,  further  comments  be  needed,  the  student,  may  be  referred  to  the  special 
dissertation  of  Calmet.  See  Journal  of  Sacr.  Lit.  for  1848,  p.  112,  and  comp. 
Larduer,  Works,  Vol.  x.  p.  340. 

2  Some  critical  writers  have  ventured  to  consider  Matthew  xxvii.  52  an  inter- 
polation. See  Norton,  Introcl.  to  the  Gospels,  Vol.  i.  p.  216,  and  compare  Gere- 
dorf,  Beitrdge,  p.  149.  Such  a  statement  is  wholly  unsupported  by  external 
evidence,  and  is  rejected  even  by  those  who  regard  this  portion  of  the  narrative 
as  mythical.  See  Meyer,  Komment.  ub.  Matt.  p.  542  (ed.  4).  Reference  has  been 
freely  made  by  this  last-mentioued  writer  and  others  to  the  Erang.  Nicodem. 
cap.  17  sq.  as  containing  the  further  development  of  the  incident.  This  state- 
ment, probably  designed  to  be  mischievous,  is  not  wholly  correct.  The  notices 
of  the  event  in  question  are  really  very  slight,  and  in  language  closely  resembling 
that  of  St.  Matthew  (see  Ecang.  Nicod.  cap.  11);  in  fact,  the  only  use  made  of 
the  incident  by  the  apocryphal  writer  is  to  introduce  the  narrative  of  Carin us 
and  Leucius,  which  refers  nearly  exclusively  to  the  Lord's  descent  into  Hades 
and  appearance  in  the  under  world.  If  the  Evang.  Nicod.  tends  to  prove  any- 
thing, it  is  this:  that  the  ancient  writer  of  that  document  regarded  Matt,  xxvii. 
52  as  an  authentic  statement,  and  as  one  which  no  current  traditions  enabled 
him  to  embellish,  but  which  was  adopted  as  a  convenient  starting-point  for  his 
legendary  narrative. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  325 

testimony  of  nature  to  the  truth  of  the  mighty  mystery  of 
redeeming  Love. 

And  now  the  day  was  beginning  to  wane,  and  within 
Jerusalem   all    was   preparation    for   paschal 

*       *  The  removal  from 

solemnities  which    henceforth  were    to   lose     aterauana 

,      .       ,  ,     ,  .  r>  T-,  of  the  Lord's  body. 

their  deepest  and  truest  significance,     imager 
bands    of   householders 1    were   npw   streaming    into    the 
temple,  each  one  to  slay  his  victim,  and  to  make  ready 
for   the   feast.     It  was  a  Passover  of  great 

JoAnxix.Sl, 

solemnity.     The   morrow  was  a  high  day,  a 
double  Sabbath,  a  day  which  was  alike  the  solemn  fifteenth 
of  Nisan  and  the  weekly  festival.2     Not  unnatural,  then, 
was  it  that  petition   should   be   made  to  Pilate   for   the 
prompt  removal  from  the  cross  of  the  bodies  of  those  who 
had   been  crucified  in  the  forenoon,  that  the  approaching 
day    might    not    be    legally   profaned.      The    petition    is 
granted ;   the   legs   of  the   two   malefactors 
are   broken  to   hasten   their   death,'  but  no 
bone  is  broken  of  that  sacred  body  which  now  hung  life- 
less between  them.     A  spear  is  thrust  into 

Per.  34. 

the  holy  side,  perchance  in  the  neighborhood 

of  the  heart,  to  make  sure  that  life  is  extinct,  and  forthwith 

a  twofold  sign  was  vouchsafed,  whether  natural  or  supernat- 


1  See  especially  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  IS,  p.  47  sq.,  where  this  and  other  cere- 
monies connected  with  the  Passover  are  very  fully  illustrated. 

^  The  efforts  of  those  writers  who  regard  this  Saturday  as  Xisan  10  cannot  be 
considered  successful  in  proving  it  to  have  been  a  "high  day"  (John  xix.  31). 
The  principal  fact  adduced  in  favor  of  such  an  opinion  is  that  on  this  day  the 
first-fruits  were  presented  in  the  temple.  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  3S5, 
Robinson,  Harmony,  p.  150  (Tract  Society).  If,  on  the  contrary,  the  day  be  re- 
garded as  Xisan  15,  then  all  becomes  intelligible  and  sell-explanatory,  the 
solemn  character  of  Xisan  15  being  so  well  known  and  so  distinctly  defined. 
Bee  Exod.  xii    16,  Lev.  xxiii.  7. 

8  The  breaking  of  the  legs  has  been  thought  to  include  a  coup  de  grace  (see 
Friedlieb,  Archdol.  j  48,  and  compare  Hug,  Fried.  Zeitschr.  in.  p.  67  sq.),  as  the 
cruri/ragium  would  not  seem  sufficient  in  itself  to  extinguish  life.  As,  how- 
such  an  expansion  of  the  term  has  not  been  made  out  (Auini.  Marcell. 
Hist.  xtv.  9  is  certainly  not  sufficient  to  prove  it),  and  ae  tin'  present  passage 
seems  to  show  that  it  hud  reference  to  the  death  of  the  Bufferer  (comp.  John  xix. 
33),  we  must  conclude  that  it  was  found  by  experience  to  bring  death,  possibly 
slowly,  but  thus  not  unconfonnably  with  the  fearful  nature  of  the  punishment. 

28 


326  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

ural  we  know  not,1  but  which  the  fourth  Evangelist  was 
specially  moved  to  record,  and  in  which  we  may,  with  all 
the  best  interpreters  of  the  ancient  church,  not  perhaps 
unfitly   recognize   the    sacramental   symbol    both   of  the 
communion  of  our  Master's  body  and  blood,  and  of  the 
baptismal  laver  of  regenerating  grace.     The  sacred  body 
was  taken  from  the  cross,  and  was  still  in  the  custody  of 
the  soldiers,  when  a  secret  disciple,  the  wealthy  Joseph  of 
Arimathea,  who,  as  a  member  of  the  supreme  court,  would 
know  that  the  bodies  were  to  be  removed,  now  came  to 
Golgotha,2  and,  after  finding  that  the  procurator's  permis- 
sion was  carried  out,  emboldened  himself  so 
far  as  to  beg  personally  for  the  Lord's  body 
from    that    unrighteous  judge.      The    request    is    freely 
granted,3  and  the  holy  body  is  borne  by  the 
maxr.4i.  pious   Joseph    to    a   garden   nisrh    at   hand, 

Matt,  xxvii.  GO.  x  l  °  #  a  ' 

which  was  probably  his  own  property,  and 
in  which  was  a  tomb  that  he  had  hewn  out  of  the  rock, 

1  The  emphatic  language  of  St.  John  (ch.  xix.  31)  seems  to  favor  the  opinion 
that  it  was  a  supernatural  sign.  The  use  made  of  this  incident  by  Dr.  Stroud 
(Physical  Death  of  Christ,  Lond.  1849)  and  others  to  prove  that  our  Lord  died  of 
a  ruptured  vessel  of  the  heart  is  ingenious,  but  seems  precarious.  Without  in 
any  way  availing  ourselves  of  the  ancient  statement  that  our  Lord's  death  was 
hastened  supernaturally  (see  Greswell,  Dissert,  xlii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  251),  we  may 
perhaps  reasonably  ascribe  it  to  the  exhausting  pains  of  body  (see  Richter  quoted 
by  Friedlieb,  Archdol.  §  44),  which,  though  in  ordinary  cases  not  sufficient  to 
bring  such  speedy  death,  did  so  in  the  present,  when  there  had  been  not  only 
great  physical  suffering  previously,  but  agonies  of  mind  which  human  thought 
cannot  conceive,  and  which  clearly  appear  (compare  Matt,  xxvii.  4G)  to  have 
endured  unto  the  very  end. 

2  See  Malt,  xxvii.  57,  where  the  ^X^ey  would  seem  naturally  to  have  reference 
to  the  scene  of  the  incidents  last  mentioned,  i.  e.,  to  the  place  of  crucifixion. 
While  the  soldiers  were  waiting  for  the  sequel  of  the  crurifragium  (John  xix. 
32),  Joseph  would  easily  have  had  time  to  go  to  the  praetorium  and  prefer  his 
request  to  Tilate.  The  touch  supplied  by  the  roKjx^aas  of  the  graphic  St.  Mark 
(ch.  xv.  4.1)  should  not  be  left  unnoticed. 

8  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  term  c'ScopTjffaTo  was  designedly  used  by  St. 
Mark  (ch.  xv.  45),  as  implying  that  Mate  gave  np  the  holy  body  without  de- 
manding money  for  it.  See  Wetstein,  in  loc.  Had  not  Joseph  been  moved  to 
perform  this  pious  office,  it  would  seem  that  the  Lord's  body  would  have  been 
removed  to  one  of  two  common  sepulchres  reserved  for  those  who  had  suffered 
capital  punishments,  — "unum  occisis  gladio  et  strangulatis,  alteram  lapidatis 
[qui  etiam  suspendebantur]  et  combustis.''  "  Sanhcdr."  vi.  5,  cited  by  Light- 
foot,  in  Matt,  xxvii.  58.    Comp.  Sepp,  Leben  Christi,  VI.  76,  Vol.  iii.  p.  602. 


Lect.  VII.  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  827 

wherein  man  had  never  yet  been  laid.     Aided  by  one  who 

:it  first  came  secretly  to  the  Lord  undercover 

of    night,  but  now  feared  not   to   bring   his 

princely  offering1  of  myrrh  and  aloes  openly  and  in  the 

liidit  of  day,  the    faithful  disciple  solemnly 

°  .  .  .        .  -  Jo/m  xix.  38. 

perforins  every  rite   of  honoring   sepulture. 
Yea,  the  hands  of  two  members  of  that  very  council  that 
had    condemned  the  Lord  to   death,  but  one  at  least  of 
whom  had  no  part  in  their  crime,  are  those 
that  now  tenderly  place  the  Kedeemer  s  body 
in  the  new  rock-hewn  tomb.     And  now  all  is  done,  and 
the  Sabbath  well-nigh  begun.     The  King's  Son  is  laid  in 
His  sleeping-chamber ;    the  faithful  Mary  Magdalene  and 
the  mother  of  Joses,- who  in  their  deep  grief  had  remained 
'sitting  beside  the  tomb,  now  return  to  the 
citv  to  buy  spices  and  ointments,  and  make       ,  ,      .  ' , 

"  J  l  Luke  XXIII.  ul: 

preparations  for  doing  more  completely  what 

had  now  necessarily  been  done  in   haste ;  the  great  stone 

is  rolled  against  the  opening  of  the  tomb;"'  the  two  pious 


1  This,  we  learn  from  St.  John,  was  of  the  weight  of  one  hundred  pounds  (ch. 
\i\.  89),  and  did  indeed  display  what  Chrysostom  rightly  calls  the  fj.eyaAo\pv- 
X'O-"  rV"  &  T0'£  XP7''A'a,n  ('"■  Matt.  Horn.  LXIXVin.)  of  the  faithful  and  true- 
hearted  ruler.  The  myrrh  and  aloes  were  probably  mixed,  and  in  the  form  of  a 
Coarse  powder  freely  sprinkled  between  the  b$6via  with  which  the  body  was 
swathed.  See  John  xix.  40.  For  further  details  see  Friedlieb,  Arclutol.  j  60,  p. 
171  eq.,  ami  Winer,  J:  11'/:.  Art.  "  Leichen,"  Vol.  ii.  p.  15. 

2  The  reading  is  somewhat  doubtful  (Lachmann,  Tregelles,  Tischend.,  y  'lco- 
trqros  —  apparently  rightly),  though  the  person  designated  is  not,  'WctTjtos 
being  onlj  the  Greek  form  of  the  more  familiar  laaij.  Wieseler  (Chron.  Synops. 
p.  426,  note)  adopts  the  reading  Of  the  Alexandrian  MS.,  V  'lu>(Tr)<t>,  and  colliders 
the  Mary  here  mentioned  to  have  been  the  daughter  of  the  honorable  man  who 
bore  thai  name;  this,  however,  has  been  rightly  judged  by  recent  critics  to  be 
open  to  objections,  which,  combined  with  the  small  amount  of  external  c, , 

on  which  the  reading  rests,  are  decisive  against  it.  See  Meyer,  iib.  Marl:,  p.  ISO 
(ed.  8).  With  regard  to  the  two  women,  it  would  seem  from  Matt,  xxvii.  61 
[Kab-fifievat  anivavrnov  Tti.<pov),  compared  with  Mark  xv.  47,  Luke  xxiii. 
,V>,  that  at  present  they  took  but  little  part,  but  sat  by,  stupefied  with  grief,  while 
the  two  rulers  (John  xix.  40,  tAafloi>,  tSrjffav)  performed  the  principal  rites  of 
sepulture. 

8  The  tombs  were  then  probably,  as  now,  either  («)  with  steps  and  a  descent  in 

a  perpendicular  direction,  or  (e)  in  the  face  of  the  rock,  and  with  an  entry  in  a 

or  horizontal  direction.    The  tomb  of  our  Lord  would  reem  to  have  been 

Of  the  latter  description  :  tombs  of  the  former  kind  are  perhaps  alluded  to  Luke 


328  THE   LAST   PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

rulers  turn  their  steps  to  Jerusalem,  and  all  rest  on  the 
Sabbath-day,  "according  to  the   command- 

Luke  xxiii.  56.  ,, 

merit. 
With  the  first  Evangelist's  notice  of  the  request  pre- 
ferred by  the  members  of  the  Sanhedrin  that  the  sepulchre 
should  be  guarded,  and  with  a  brief  mention 

Mall,  xxi-ii.  04.  e  ,,  ,  .  - 

Ver  66  ot  the  procurator's  curtly  expressed  permis- 

sion, the  sealing  of  the  stone,  and  the  setting 
of  the  watch,1  this  lengthened  portion  of  the  inspired 
narrative  now  comes  to  its  close. 

And  here  our  Lecture  shall  at  once  conclude.     Practical 
reflections   on   events   so   numerous,  and   of 

Conclusion. 

such  momentous  interest,  would  far  exceed 
the  limits  that  must  be  prescribed  to  this  work,2  and  would 
necessarily  involve  recapitulations  which,  in  a  narrative  so* 
simple  and  continuous  as  that  here  given  by  the  Evangel- 
ists, might  reasonably  be  judged  to  a  certain  degree  unne- 
cessary and  undesirable.  Into  such  varied  reflections,  then, 
it  may  not  now  be  wholly  suitable  to  enter.  Yet  let  us  at 
least  bear  one  truth  which  this  portion  of  our  subject  has 
presented  to  us,  practically,  vitally,  and  savingly,  in  mind, 
—  even  the  everlasting  truth,  that  our  sins  have  been 
atoned  for,  that  they  have  been  borne  by  our  Lord  on  His 

xi.  44.  The  stone  which  was  rolled  against  the  opening  and  in  this  case  appears  to 
have  completely  filled  it  up  (comp.  John  xx.  1,  Sk  tov  fj.vr)/j.elov,  and  see  Meyer, 
in  loc.)  was  technically  termed  Golal  (":h}Z;  see  Sepp,  Leben  Chr.  vi.  77,  Vol. 
iii.  p.  G08),  and  was  usually  of  considerable  size  (Mark  xvi.  4).  See  Pearson, 
Creed,  Art.  iv.  Vol.  ii.  p.  1S7  sq.  (ed.  Burton),  and  on  the  subject  generally,  the 
special  work  of  Nicolai  in  Ugolini,  Thesaur.  Vol.  xxxiii.,  and  Winer,  RWB. 
Art.  "  Graber,"  Vol.  i.  p.  443  sq. 

1  See  Matt,  xxvii.  65,  where  the  verb  «X6Te  would  seem  more  naturally  imper- 
ative than  indicative,  as  in  the  latter  case  the  reference  could  only  be  to  such  a 
KovcrTU)o"ia,  as  the  chief  priests  had  at  their  disposal,  i.  e.,  temple  guards,  whereas 
the  actual  watchers  were  Roman  soldiers.  See  Matt,  xxviii.  14.  In  the  former 
case  permission  is  given  in  the  form  of  a  brusquely  expressed  command,  means 
being  supplied  for  it  to  be  carried  out. 

2  It  may  again  be  noticed  (see  above,  p.  51,  note  1)  that  both  this  and  the  follow- 
ing Lecture  were  not  preached,  the  nuniber  required,  owing  to  recent  changes, 
being  only  six.  The  omission  of  practical  comments  or  hortatory  application 
will  thus  seem  perhaps  not  only  natural  but  desirable,  as  such  addresses,  if 
merely  of  a  general  character,  and  not  made  to  a  special  audience,  can  rarely 
be  satisfactory. 


Lect.  VII.  THE    LAST   PASSOVER.  329 

cross,  and  that  by  His  stripes  we  have  been  healed.     God 
grunt  that  this  belief  of  our  fathers  and  our 
forefathers,  and  of  the  holiest  and  the  wisest 
of  every  age  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  may  not  at  length 
become  modified  and  diluted.     Let  words  of  controversy 
here  appear  not.     Let  no  terms  of  party  strife  appear  at 
the  close  of  a  narrative  of  a  love  boundless  as  the  universe, 
and  of  a  sacrifice  of  which  the  sweet-smell- 
ing savor  has  pervaded  every  realm  of  be- 
ing,—  let  none  such  meet  the  eye  of  the  reader  of  these 
concluding  lines.     Yet  let  the  prayer  be  offered  with  all 
lowliness  and  humility  that  these  weak  words  may  have 
been  permitted  to  strengthen  belief  in  the  Atonement,  to 
convince  the  fair  and  candid  reader  of  the  written  Word 
that  here  there  is  something  more  than  the  perfection  of 
a  self-denial,  something  more  than  a  great  moral  spectacle 
at  which  we  may  gaze  in  a  perplexed  wonder,  but  of  which 
the  benefits  to  us  are  but  indirect,  the  realities  but  exem- 
plary. 

O,  no,  no!  That  blood,  which,  as  it  were,  we  have  be- 
held falling  drop  by  drop  on  Golgotha,  fell  not  thus  fruit- 
lessly to  the  earth.  Those  curtains  of  darkness  shrouded 
something  more  than  the  manifestation  of  a  moral  sublim- 
ity. That  cry  of  agony  and  desolation  told  of  something 
more  than  a  souse  of  merely  personal  suffering,  or  the 
closing  exhaustions  of  a  distressed  humanity.  The  very 
outward  circumstances  of  the  harrowing  history  raise 
their  voices  against  such  a  bleak  and  cheerless  theosophy. 
The  very  details  of  the  varied  scenes  of  agony  and  woe 
plead  meekly,  yet  persuasively,  against  such  an  estimate  of 
the  sufferings  of  an  Incarnate  God.  O,  may  deeper  med- 
itation on  these  things  bring  conviction !  May  those  who 
yet  believe  in  the  perfections  of  their  humanity,  and  doubt 
lie  efficacies  of  their  Redeemer's  blood,  unlearn  that  joy- 
1'  188  'Teed.  May  the  speculators  here  cense  to  speculate; 
may  the  casuist  learn  to  adore.  Yea,  to  us  all  may  fuller 
measures  of  faith  and  of  saving  assurance  yet  be  minis- 

28* 


830  THE   LAST    PASSOVER.  Lect.  VII. 

tered,  that  with  heart  and  mind  and  soul  and  spirit  we 

may  verily  and   indeed   believe   that    "  Christ   was  once 

offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many,"  and  that, 

eix'"'         even  as  the  beloved  Apostle  has  said,  "He 

1  John  xi.  2.  l  ' 

is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins,  and  not  for 
ours  only,  but  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world." 


LECTURE   VIII. 

THE  FORTY  DAYS. 

GO  TO  HIT  BRETIIREN,  AND    8AV    UNTO    THEM,  I    ASCEND    UNTO    MY    FATHER, 
AND  YOUR  PATUER;    AND  TO  MY  GOD,  AND  YOUR  GOD.  —  St.  John.  XX.  17. 

The  portion  of  the  inspired  narrative  at  which  Ave  have 
now  arrived  is  the  shortest,  but  by  no  means 
the    least   important   of   the    divisions   into     T,„"„™ 
which  it  has  appeared  convenient  to  separate 
the  Gospel  history.     In  some  respects,  indeed,  it  may  be 
rightly  termed  the  most  important,  as  containing  the  ac- 
count of  that  which  was  in  fact  the  foundation  of  all  apos- 
tolical preaching,  and  which,  when  alluding  to  the  subject 
generally,  St.  Paul  has  not  scrupled  to  speak 
of  as  that  which  alone  gives  a  reality  to  our 
faith  here   and  to  our  hope  of  what  shall   be  hereafter.1 
The  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  of  Him  whom  Joseph 
and  Nicodemus  laid  in  the  new  rock-hewn  tomb,  is  no  less 
the  solemn  guarantee  to  us  of  the  truth  of  that  in  which 
Ave  have  believed,  than  it  is  also  the  holy  pledge  to  us  of 
our  own  future  victory  over  death  and  corruption. 

On  the  history  of  such  an  adorable  manifes-        Doctrinal  quo- 
tation  of  the   divine  power  and  majesty  of    ';'"'"'  """""'■" 

l  J         J  this  portion  hi  tin: 

Him  Avho  saved  us,  and  Avho  has  thus  given     *&*»•?. 

an  infallible  proof  that  He  had  as  much  the  power2  to  take 

1  The  nature  of  the  apostle's  argument,  and  the  reciprocal  inferences,  viz., 
"  thai  Christ's  resurrection  from  the  dead  is  the  necessary  cause  of  our  resurrec- 
tion," and  "that  our  future  resurrection  necessarily  infers  Christ's  resurrection 
from  the  dead,"  so  that  ••  the  denial  or  doubt  of  our  resurrection  infers  a  doubt 
or  deuial  of  His  resurrection,"  are  well  discussed  by  the  learned  Jackson, in 
his  valuable  Commentaries  on  the  Creed,  xi.  16. 1,  Vol.  x.  p.  807  sij.  (Oxford, 
1844). 

2  The  catholic  doctrine  on  the  agency  by  which  Christ  was  raised  from  the 


332  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

His  life  again  as  He  had  the  mercy  to  lay  it  clown  —  on 
such  a  history,  meet  indeed  will  it  be  for  us 

John  x.  IS.  J  ' 

to  dwell  with  thoughtfulness,  precision,  and 
care.  Meet  indeed  will  it  be  to  strive  to  bring  into  one 
every  ray  of  divine  truth,  as  vouchsafed  to  us  in  this  por- 
tion of  the  Evangelical  history,  to  miss  no  hint,  to  over- 
look no  inference  whereby  our  faith  in  our  risen  and  as- 
cended Lord  may  become  more  real  and  more  vital,  and 
our  conviction  of  our  own  resurrection  more  assured  and 
more  comjylete.1 

And  not  of  our  own  resurrection  only,  but  even  of  what 
lies  beyond.  Yea,  hints  there  are  of  partial  answers  not 
only  to  the  question  "  How  are  the  dead  raised  ?"  but  even 
to  that  further  and  more  special  question,  "With  what 
body  do  they  come?  "  which  so  perplexed  the  doubters  of 
Corinth,  and  remains  even  to  this  day  such  a  subject  of 
controversy  and  debate.  Into  such  questions  the  general 
character  of  my  present  undertaking  will  wholly  preclude 
me  from  entering,  either  formally  or  at  length  ;  nay,  in  a 
professed  recital  of  events  it  will  scarcely  be  convenient  to 
call  away  the  attention  of  the  reader  from  a  simple  con- 
sideration of  facts  to  their  probable  use  as  bases  for 
speculative  meditation;  still  it  will  not  be  unsuitable  or 

dead  is  nowhere  better  or  more  clearly  stated  than  by  Bp.  Pearson,  who,  while 
stating  the  general  truth  "that  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  raised  Christ 
from  the  dead,"  shows  also  that  the  special  truth  "that  the  Lord  raised  Him- 
self" is  distinct  and  irrefragable,  as  resting  on  our  Lord's  own  words  (John  ii. 
22),  and  the  way  in  which  those  words  were  understood  by  the  apostles:  "If, 
upon  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  the  apostles  believed  those  words  of  Christ, 
'Destroy  this  temple,  and  I  will  raise  it  up  again,'  then  did  they  believe  that 
Christ  raised  Himself;  for  in  those  words  there  is  a  person  mentioned  which 
raised  Christ,  and  no  other  person  mentioned  but  Himself."  —  Exposition,  of  the 
Creed,  Art.  v.  Vol.  i.  p.  303  (ed.  Burton). 

1  It  has  been  well  said  by  Dr.  Thomas  Jackson,  that  "every  man  is  bound  to 
believe  that  all  true  believers  of  Christ's  resurrection  from  the  dead  shall  be 
undoubted  partakers  of  that  endless  and  immortal  glory  into  which  Christ  hath 
been  raised.  But  no  man  is  bound  to  believe  his  own  resurrection,  in  particular, 
into  such  glory  any  further,  or  upon  more  certain  terms,  than  he  can  (upon  just 
and  deliberate  examination)  find  that  himself  doth  steadfastly  believe  this  fuu- 
damental  article  of  Christ's  resurrection  from  the  dead." —  Commentaries  on  the 
Creed,  XI.  16.  11,  Vol.  x.  p.  326  sq.,  where  there  is  also  a  short  but  excellent  prac- 
tical application  of  the  doctrine. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY  DAYS.  333 

inappropriate  to  bestow  such  a  careful  consideration  on 
those  parts  of  the  subject  which  need  it  on  their  own 
account,  as  will  also  incidentally  prove  suggestive  of  fruit- 
ful thoughts  in  reference  to  our  future  state,  our  hopes  and 
our  expectations.  The  remembrance  that  our  risen  Lord 
was  the  veritable  first-fruits  of  them  that  slept,  that  as  He 
rose  we  shall  rise,  will  always  press  upon  us  the  thought 
that  the  nature  of  His  resurrection-body1  must  involve 
something,  at  any  rate,  remotely  analogous  to  the  nature 
of  the  future  bodies  of  His  glorified  servants,  and  must 
insensibly  lead  us  to  dwell  with  thoughtful  care  upon  all 
the  circumstances  and  details  relating  to  those  appearances 
which  we  are  now  about  to  recount.  Let  us,  then,  address 
ourselves  to  this  important  portion  of  the  inspired  history 
with  all  earnestness  and  sobriety.  Never  was  there  a  time 
when  meditation  on  the  history  of  the  risen  yet  not  ascen- 


l  This  difficult  subject  will  not  l>e  formally  discussed  in  the  text,  but  in  every 
case  comments  will  be  made  upon  the  nature  of  those  appearances  which  seem 
i«i  require  more  special  consideration.  From  these,  and,  above  all,  from  a  sound 
tical  discus.-ion  of  the  passages  in  question,  the  student  will  perhaps  be 
enabled  to  arrive  at  some  opinion  upon  a  very  important  subject.  Meanwhile, 
without  anticipating  what  will  be  best  considered  separately  and  in  detail,  it  may 
be  well  to  notice  that  there  base  been,  roughly  speaking,  three  opinions  on  the 
subject :  (a)  that  our  Lord's  body  was  the  same  natural  body  of  flesh  and  blood 
that  had  been  crucified  and  laid  in  the  tomb;  (b)  that  it  was  wholly  changed  at 
the  resurrection,  and  became  simply  an  ethereal  body,  something  between 
matter  and  spirit  (wairepd  iu  fxf\>opiw  tw\  tt)s  waxuT^ros  t?js  irpb  rov  trddovs 
awuaros  Kal  rov  yv/xu^v  roiovrov  aw/xaros  (pairjeadai  \puxvv  —  Origen.  contr. 
<  'i  Is.  a.  62);  (c)  that  it  was  the  same  as  before,  but  endued  with  new  powers,  prop- 
eities,  and  attributes.  Of  these  views  (a)  is  open  to  very  serious  objections,  aris- 
ing from  the  many  passages  which  seem  clearly  to  imply  either  (1)  that  there  was 
a  change  in  the  outward  appearance  of  our  Lord's  body,  or  (2)  that  its  appear- 
ances and  disappearances  involved  something  supernatural.  Again,  (6)  seems 
plainly  irreconcilable  with  our  Lord's  own  declaration  (Luke  xxiv.  39),  and 
with  the  fact  that  His  holy  body  was  touched,  handled,  and  proved  experiment- 
ally to  be  real.  Between  these  two  extremes  (c)  seems  soberly  to  meditate,  and 
i-  the  opinion  maintained  by  (reneus,  Tertullian,  Hilary,  Augustine  (but  not 
exclusively),  and  other  sound  writers  of  the  early  church.  As  will  be  seen  from 
what  follows,  it  appears  best  to  reconcile  all  apparent  differences  in  the  accounts 
of  the  Lord's  appearances,  ami,  to  say  the  very  least,  deserves  the  student's 
most  thoughtful  consideration.  For  a  very  complete  article  on  this  subject,  Bee 
the  Dibliotheca  8acra  tor  1846,  Vol.  ii.  p.  292.  The  writer  (Dr.  Robinson)  advo- 
cates ('/),  hut  supplies  much  interesting  matter  and  many  useful  quotations  iu 
reference  to  the  other  opinions. 


384  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

ded  Lord  were  more  likely  to  be  useful  than  now ;  never 
was  there  an  age  when  it  was  more  necessary  to  set  forth 
events  that  not  only  imply  but  practically  prove  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body,1  and  that  not  only  suggest  but  confirm 
that  teaching  of  the  Church  in  reference  to  the  future  state 
which  it  is  the  obvious  tendency  of  the  speculations  of  our 
own  times  to  explain  away,  to  modify,  or  to  deny.2 

Ere,  however,  we   proceed  to  the  regular  and  orderly 
recital  of  the  events  of  this  portion  of  the 

diaraeteristics  of  *■ 

the  present  portion     evangelical  history,  let  us  pause  for  a  moment 

of  the  narrative.  . 

to  make  a  few  brief  comments  on  the  general 

character  of  the  different  records  of  the  inspired  narrators. 

With  regard  to  the  number  of  those  holy  records,  the 

,r  .      „  ,      same  remarks  that  were  made  at  the  betrin- 

Number  of  the  ~ 

amounts.  ning  of  the  last  Lecture  may  here  be  repeated, 

as  equally  applicable  to  the  portion  of  the 
sacred  history  now  before  us.  Events  of  such  a  moment- 
ous nature  as  those  which  followed  our  Lord's  death  and 
burial  were  not  to  be  told  by  one,  but  by  all.  If  all  relate 
how  the  holy  body  of  the  Lord  was  laid  in  the  tomb,  surely 
all  shall  relate  how  on  the  third  morning  the  tomb  was 
found  empty,  and  how  angelical  witnesses3  declared  that 
the  Lord  had  risen.  If  all  relate  how  holy  women  were 
spectators  of  their  Redeemer's  suffering,  shall  not  all  relate 


1  Some  of  the  more  popular  quasi  scientific  objections  to  the  received  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  body  are  noticed,  discussed,  and  fairly  answered,  in 
an  article  by  Prof.  Goodwin  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  1852,  Vol.  ix.  p.  1  sq. 
For  earlier  objections,  see  Jackson,  Creed,  xi.  15,  Vol.  x.  p.  283  sq. 

2  Information  is  so  often  sought  for  in  vain  on  the  subject  of  the  general 
teaching  of  the  best  writers  of  the  early  Church  on  the  Doctrine  of  the  Last 
Things  (Eschatology,  as  it  is  now  called),  that  we  may  pause  to  refer  the  student 
to  a  learned  volume  now  nearly  forgotten,  Burnet,  de  Statu  Mortuorum  et  Ue- 
sitrgi  ntium,  London,  1728. 

3  The  first  point,  the  fact  that  the  tomb  was  empty,  and  the  body  not  there,  is 
very  distinctly  put  forward  by  all  the  four  Evangelists.  Compare  Matt,  xxviii. 
i',  Mark  xvi.  0,  Luke  xxiv.  3.  John  xx.  2,  6,  7.  The  second  point,  the  angelical 
testimony,  is,  strictly  considered,  only  specified  by  the  first  three  Evangelists: 
St.  John  relates  the  appearance  of  two  angels,  and  their  address  to  Mary  Mag- 
dalene (ch.  xx.  13),  but  the  testimony  which  they  deliver  to  the  women  (Matt, 
xxviii.  G,  Mark  xvi.  6,  Luke  xxiv.  6)  is,  in  the  case  of  Mary  Magdalene,  prac- 
tically delivered  by  the  Lord  Himself. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAY.-.  335 

how  some  at  least  of  this  ministering  company1  were  first 
to  hear  the  glad  tidings  of  His  victory  over  the  grave,  and 
to  proclaim  it  to  His  doubting  Apostles?  If  all,  as  we 
have  seen  in  the  last  Lecture,  have  so  minutely  described 
the  various  scenes  of  the  Passion,  can  we  wonder  that  all 
were  moved  to  record  some  of  the  more  striking  scenes  of 
the  great  forty  days  that  followed,  and  that  afforded  to  the 
disciples  the  visible  proofs  of  the  Lord's  resurrection?2  It 
could  not  indeed  be  otherwise.  These  things  must  be  told 
by  all,  though,  as  in  other  portions  of  the  Gospel  history, 
all  have  not  been  moved  to  specify  exactly  the  same  inci- 
dents. 

Nay,  when  we  come  to  consider  the  pre-       net,-  reennm-i- 

,        .  *     . ,  ~  ,       ,  ties  and  differences. 

cise  nature  and  character  of   the  tour  holy 
records  we  meet  with  some  striking  and  instructive  differ- 
ences.3    The  first  two  Evangelists  devote  no  more  than 


1  The  women  mentioned  as  having  visited  the  sepulchre  are  not  the  same  even 
in  the  case  of  the  h'i>t  three  E\  angelists.  This,  however,  can  cause  no  real  diffi- 
culty, ae  the  lact  thai  St.  Matthew  only  mentions  Mary  Magdalene  and  "the 
other  Mary"  (the  wife  of  <  lopas  or  Alpbens,  and  sister  of  the  Virgin ;  see  above, 
]>.  319,  n.  2)  in  no  way  implies  that  others  were  not  with  them.  From  St.  Mark 
(eh.  xvi.  1)  «<■  learn  that  Salome  was  also  present;  and  from  St.  Luke  (oh.  xxiv. 
1  compared  with  ch.  xxiii.  49  and  00)  we  should  naturally  draw  the  same  infer- 
when,  how e\ it,  the  Evangelist  pauses  a  little  later  tospecify  by  name, 
Salome  is  not  mentioned  but  Joanna  (ch.  xxiv.  10),  the  al  Xoural  aiiv  avials 
including  Salome,  and.  as  it  would  appear,  others  not  named  by  any  of  the 
Evangelists.  The  attempt  of  Greswell  (Dissert,  xi.in.  Vol.  iii.  p.  264  sq.]  to 
pro\  e  thai  there  were  two  parties  of  women,  the  one  the  party  of  Salome,  and 
the  other  the  patty  of  Joanna,  is  very  artificial,  and  really  does  but  little  to 
remove  the  difficulties  which  seem  to  have  given  rise  to  the  hypothesis. 

8  So  rightly  Augustine :  "Ergoadcorum  [discipuiorum]  confirmationem  dig- 
natus  est  post  resurrectionem  vivere  cum  illis  quadraginta  diebus  integrie,  ab 
ipso  die  passionis  sum  usque  in  hodiernum  diem  [fest.  Asccnsionis],  intrans  ct 
exiens,  manducans  el  bibens,  stout  dicil  Scriptura  [Act.  i.  8, 4],  confirmans  hoc 
redditum  esse  ocnlis  eorum  post  resurrectioncm,  quod  ablatum  erat  per  orucem." 
A  rro.  i  i  \\w.  Vol.  v.  p.  1212 (ed.  Mign6).  The  reasons  suggested  by  the  same 
author  (p.  1211,  1216)  why  the  interval  was  exactly  forty  days,  are  ingenious,  but 
scarcely  satisfactory. 

3  These  differences,  when  studiously  collected  and  paraded  out  (see  De  Wette, 
■  [i  s  Evanff.  Matt.  p.  806,  ed.  8),  at  tirst  set  m  very  Btartling  and  irreconcil- 
able. They  cease,  however,  at  once  to  appear  so  when  we  only  pause  to  observe 
the  brevity  of  the  sacred  writers,  and  remember  thai  an  additional  know 

of  perhaps  no  more  than  two  or  three  particulars  would  enable  lis  at  once  to 
reconcile  all  that  seems  discordant.  See  a  ^ood  article  by  Robinson  in  the  Bib- 
Uotheca  Sacra  for  1846,  Vol.  ii.  p.  162.    At  the  end  (p.  189)  will  be  found  a  useful 


obb  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

twenty  verses  each  to  the  history  of  this  period,  and  are 
but  brief  in  their  notices  of  the  appearances  of  the  risen 
Lord,  though  explicit  as  to  the  circumstances  under  which 
the  first  witnesses  of  the  resurrection  were  enabled  to 
give  their  testimony.  The  third  and  fourth  Evangelists, 
on  the  other  hand,  have  each  given  a  record  nearly  three 
times  as  long,  and  have  each  related  with  great  exactness 
the  circumstances  of  selected  instances  of  the  Redeemer's 
manifestation  of  Himself,  wherein  He  more  especially 
vouchsafed  to  show  that  He  had  raised  again  the  same 
body  that  had  been  laid  in  Joseph's  sepulchre ;  that  it  was 
indeed  He  Himself,  their  very  own  adorable 
Master  and  Lord.  And  yet  both  in  this  and 
other  differences  we  can  hardly  fail  to  be  struck  by  the 
divine  harmony  that  pervades  the  whole,  and  must  again 
be  led  to  recognize  in  this  portion  of  the  history,  with  all 
its  seeming  discrepancies,  what  we  have  so  often  already 
observed  in  earlier  portions,  how  strikingly  the  Evangel- 
ical accounts  illustrate  by  their  differences,  and  how  the 
very  omissions  in  one  or  two  of  the  sacred  records  will 
sometimes  be  found  to  place  even  in  a  clearer  light,  and  to 
reflect  a  fuller  and  truer  significance  on  what  others  have 
been  moved  to  record.  If,  for  example,  two  Evangelists 
would  thus  appear  to  dwell  simply  upon  the  fact  of  the 
Resurrection,  the  other  two,  we  observe,  were  specially 
guided  to  set  forth  the  proofs  of  its  true  nature,  its  reality, 
and  its  certainty.1  If,  again,  we  might  be  induced  to 
think  from  the  words  of  the  first  and  second  Evangelists 
that  Galilee  was  to  be  more  especially  the  land  blessed  by 
the  appearances  of  the  risen  Saviour,  the  two  others  direct 

selected  list  of  treatises  both  on  the  subject  of  the  Resurrection  and  on  the  prin- 
cipal events  connected  therewith. 

l  It  can  hardly  escape  the  notice  of  the  observant  reader  that  while  the  first 
and  second  Evangelists  dwell  mainly  on  the  fact  that  the  Lord  was  risen  from 
the  dead,  the  third  and  fourth  Evangelists  dwell  most  upon  the  reality  of  the 
body  that  was  raised  (Luke  xxiv.  30,  39,  41  Bq.;  comp.  Acts  i.  3)  and  its  identity 
with  that  which  was  crucified.  Compare  John  xx.  20,  27.  The,  so  to  speak, 
crucial  test  of  eating  is  alone  referred  to  by  these  Evangelists  —  being  definitely 
specified,  Luke  xxiv.  43,  and  perhaps  implied,  John  xxi.  12  sq. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE  FORTY   DAYS.  337 

our  thoughts  more  to  Judasa,  and  yet  one  of  these  joins  the 
testimony  of  an  eye-witness  to  that  of  the  first  two  by  his 
explicit  and  most  undoubtedly  genuine1  account  of  the 
Lord's  appearance  at  the  most  favored  scene 

1  r    _  Mark  xvi.  1!). 

of  His  Galilean  ministry.2  If,  lastly,  two  Luktxxiv.n. 
only  of  the  four  witnesses  have  been  moved 
to  record  the  Ascension,  the  other  two  have  taught  us  by 
their  very  silence,  in  the  first  place,  to  view  that  last  event 
of  the  Gospel  history  in  its  true  light,  as  so  entirely  the 
necessary  and  natural  sequel  of  what  preceded,  that  Apos- 
tles could  leave  it  unrecorded;  and,  in  the  second  place, 
thus  to  realize  more  deeply  the  true  mystery  of  the  Resur- 
rection, to  see  and  to  feel  how  it  included  and  involved  all 


1  On  this  point  it  is  not  necessary  to  dwell  at  length.  There  is  not  a  vestige  of 
external  evidence  to  lead  us  to  think  that  the  early  Church  entertained  the 
slightest  doubt  of  John  xxi.  being  written  by  the  Apostle  St.  John.  Internal 
evidence  has  nothing  else  whatever  to  rest  upon  than  the  two  seeming  conclu- 
sions, ch.  xx.  30  s<i.,  and  ch.  xxi.  24  sq. ;  it  being  now  admitted  by  the  best  recent 
critics  of  the  Apostle's  language  (see  esp.  Meyer,  Komment.  p.  510)  that  ch.  xxi. 
came  from  his  hand.  On  such  evidence,  or  rather  absence  of  evidence,  we  shall, 
probably,  be  slow  to  believe,  with  Wieseler  (comp.  Chron.  Synope.  p.  418,  and  his 
special  dissertation  on  the  subject),  that  John  xxi.  was  written  by  John  the 
Presbyter. 

2  Few  points  have  been  dwelt  upon  more  studiously  by  sceptical  and  semi- 
sceptical  writers  than  the  assumed  fact  that  St.  Matthew  and  St.  Mark  (ch.  xvi. 
9 — 20  being  presupposed  to  be 'not  genuine)  regard  Galilee  as  the  scene  of  the 
Lord's  appearances  (Matt,  xxviii.  7,  10,  10  sq.;  Mark  xvi.  7),  while  St.  Luke  and 
St.  John  (ch.  xxi.  is  commonly  assumed  by  such  writers  to  be  notgeuuine)  place 
them  in  .iiiiimi.  Compare  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synope.  p.  421  sq.  Now,  in  the  first 
place,  such  a  statement  rests  upon  two  assumptions,  the  first  of  which  is  open  to 
some  doubt  (see  above,  p.  40,  note  1),  and  the  second  of  which  is  inconsistent 
wilh  evidence  (sec  the  preceding  note);  and  in  the  second  place,  even  if  we  con- 
cede these  two  assumptions,  what  more  can  be  fairly  said  than  this,  —  that  St. 
Matthew  relates  two  appearances  only,  one  confessedly  in  Galilee  (ch.  xxviii. 
M),  but  one  most  certainly  in  Juda-a  (ch.  xxviii.  9,  10);  that  St.  Mark's  Gospel  is 
according  to  assumption  imperfect,  and  cannot  be  pleaded  for  either  side;  that 
St.  Luke  and  St.  John  (ch.  xx.)  have  recorded  special  appearances  of  a  highly 
important  nature  in  reference  to  the  object  which  they  seem  mainly  to  have  had 
in  view  (see  p.  33G,  note  1),  and  that  these,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  would  be 
very  soon  after  the  Resurrection,  and  by  consequence  in  Judxa?  Even  then 
with  the  two  concessions  above  alluded  to  our  opponents  cannot  be  regarded  as 
having  dome  much  to  Impair  the  harmony  of  the  Evangelical  records,  or  to 
establish  the  favorite  theory  of  different  "traditions"  of  the  Resurrection. 
Compare  Meyer,  Komment.  \tb.  Matt.  p.  &i>3,  where  this  untenable  hypothesis  is 
put  forward  and  defended. 

29 


338  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

that  followed,  and  how  it  truly  was  that  one  great  victory 
over  sin  and  death  that  made  every  minor  conquest  over 
earthly  relations    a  matter  of  certain  and    inevitable  se- 
quence.1    If,  on  the  one  hand,  St.  Luke  has  told  us  how 
the  Lord  "was  carried  up  into  heaven,"  and 
St.  Mark2  has  followed  Him  with  the  eye  of 
faith  even  up  to  the  moment  of  His  session  at  the  right 
hand  of  God,  no  less,  on  the  other,  is  our  text 
a  most  significant  testimony  from  the  beloved 
Apostle,  that,  when  the  Lord  arose,  that  ascension  had  vir- 
tually commenced,  that  He  rose  to  ascend,  and  that  in  the 
early  dawning  of  that  Easter  morn  the  Lord's  return  to 
the  throne  of  Omnipotence  was  already  begun3  —  "I  as- 
cend to  my  Father  and  your  Father,  and  to 

Ch.  xx.  17.  J  J 

my  God  and  your  God." 
We  might  extend  these  observations,  but  enough,  per- 
haps, has  been  said  to  indicate  the  general 
Resumption o/ the     character  of  this  portion  of  the  inspired  nar- 

narrative.  1  L 

rative,  and  the  general  nature  of  the  difficul- 
ties we  may  expect  to  meet  with.     We  must  now  turn  to 


1  It  may  be  remarked  how  comparatively  little  the  ascension  of  our  Lord  is 
dwelt  upon  by  the  early  writers,  compared  with  their  references  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, and  it  may  also  be  observed  that  the  special  festival,  though  undoubtedly 
of  great  antiquity  (see  Augustine,  Epist.  ad  Januar.  liv.  Vol.  ii.  p.  200,  cd. 
Migne),  and  certainly  regarded  in  the  fourth  century  as  one  of  the  great  festi- 
vals (Const.  Apost.  viii.  33),  is  still  not  alluded  to  by  any  of  the  earliest  writers, 
Justin  Martyr,  Iren;eus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Cyprian,  and  is  not  in- 
cluded in  the  list  of  festivals  enumerated  by  Origen  (contr.  Cels.  vm.  21,  22). 
See  Riddle,  Christian  Antiq.  p.  678.  The  preaching  of  the  apostles  was  preemi- 
nently the  resurrection  of  Christ  (Acts  ii.  31,  iv.  33  al.),  as  that  which  included  in 
it  everything  besides;  it  was  from  this  that  the  early  Church  derived  all  its  full- 
est grounds  of  assurance.    Comp.  Clem.  Rom.  Epist.  ad  Cor.  cap.  42. 

2  For  a  brief  discussion  of  the  arguments  in  favor  of  the  genuineness  of  the 
concluding  verses  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel,  see  above,  Lect.  I.  p.  40,  note. 

3  Though  the  use  of  the  present  ava&alva)  John  xx.  17)  man  be  regarded  as 
ethical,  i.  e.,  as  indicating  what  was  soon  and  certainly  to  take  place  (see  Winer, 
Gram.  §  40.  2,  p.  237,  ed.  6),  it  seems  here  more  simple  to  regard  it  as  temporal,  — 
as  indicating  a  process  which  had  in  fact  already  begun.  The  extreme  view  of 
this  text,  as  indicating  that  an  ascension  of  our  Lord  took  place  on  the  same 
day  that  He  rose  (Kinkel,  in  Stud.  u.  Krit.  for  1841,  translated  in  Bibliotheca 
Sacra,  Vol.  i.  p.  152  sq.),  is,  it  is  needless  to  say,  plainly  to  be  rejected,  as  incon- 
sistent with  Acts  i.  3,  and  numerous  other  passages  in  all  the  four  Gospels. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  339 

its  subject-matter,  and  to  a  consideration  of  the  few  but 
notable  events  which  mark  this  concluding  part  of  our 
Redeemer's  history. 

One  of  the  last  events  in  the  preceding  portion  of  our 
narrative  is  that  which  connects  us  with  the 

.  •  ,         -n    •  3  -ii  t^'1  of  the  u'°" 

present,  and  unites  the  Jbriday  eve  with  the  men  to  the  «■,.«/- 
Easter  morn.  This  we  observe  especially  in 
the  Gospel  of  the  historian  Evangelist,  who,  without  any 
break  or  marked  transition,  relates  to  us  how  the  minister- 
ing women  of  Galilee  now  come  to  perform  the  pious 
work  for  which  they  had  made  preparations  on  the  Friday 
evening.  They  had  bought  spices  and  oint- 
ments ere  the  Sabbath  had  commenced,  and 

'  Hark  xvi.  1. 

again,  as  it  would  seem,  after  its  legal  conclu- 
sion on  the  Saturday  evening.  Every  preparation  was  thus 
fully  made,  and  it  remained  only  that  with  the  earliest  light 
of  the  coming  day  they  should  bear  their  offering  to  the 
sepulchre,  and  tenderly  anoint  that  sacred  body1  which 
tiny  had  seen  laid  in  haste,  though  with  all  reverence  and 
honor,  in  the  new  rock-hewn  tomb.  It  was  still  dark  wdien 
they  set  out,  and  their  hearts  were  as  sad  and  as  gloomy 
as  the  shadows  of  the  night  that  were  still  lingering  around 
them.2     But  the  mere  needs  of  the  present  were  what  now 


l  The  object  is  more  definitely  stated  by  St.  Mark  than  by  St.  Matthew.  The 
first  Evangelist  says  generally  that  it  was  i&ecoprjffai  rbv  ra.<pov  (ch.  xxviii.  1); 
t!.c  Becond  specifies  more  exactly  that  it  was  'iva.  aAetyaxxii'  abr6v  (ch.  xvi.  1). 
It  will  1»-  remembered  that  when  our  Lord  was  interred,  spices  were  only  strewn 
beta  'i'ii  tli'-  folds  of  the  swathing  bands  (John  xix.  40;  compare  p.  327,  note  1); 
tip-  object  o!  the  women  was  now  to  spread  over  the  sacred  body  the  customary 
liquid  perfumes.    Sec  tin-swell.  Dissert,  xliii.  Vol.  iii.  p.  200. 

-'  Some  little  difficult;  has  arisen  from  the  apparently  different  definitions  of 
the  time  of  the  visit  to  the  sepulchre,  as  specified  in  the  four  Evangelists,  the 
two  extremes  being,  that  of  St.  John,  crKorias  in  ovo-qs  (ch.  xx.  1),  and  the 
second  of  St.  Mark,  waTtihavros  rov  r,\iov  (ch.  xvi.  2).  Were  these  the  only 
notes  (if  time,  we  might  have  been  led  to  suppose  that  the  first  referred  to  the 
time  of  starting,  the  second  of  arriving  at  the  Sepulchre.  As,  however,  St. 
Hark  bae  another  note  of  time  At'oi'  wpcci  (rer.  '2).  and  as  this  is  supported  by  the 
rrj  tTTLtpaxTKovfTi)  |sc.  Tj/xtpa.]  (is  p-iav  <Ta/3/3aTcui'  of  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxviii.  1) 
a  ml  the  ut'dpov  jSa^f'ws  of  St.  Luke  (el  i.  xxiv.  1 ),  the  most  natural  conclusion  is 
that  the  awreiX.  ToCfjAtov  to  not  to  be  referred  to  the  actual  phenomenon  (Meyer, 
al.)  but  to  Le  regarded  only  as  a  general  definition  of  time.     See  liobinson, 


340  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

mainly  occupied  their  thoughts  :     Who  was  to  roll  away 
for  them  the  great  stone  they  had  seen  but 
two  nights  before  so  closely  fitted  in  its  ap- 
pointed place?1     Where    were   the    strong   and    zealous 
hands  that  were  to  open  that  door  that  would  lead  them 
to  their  Lord  ?     While  thus  musing,  and  as  yet,  as  it  would 
seem,  at  some  distance  from  the  sepulchre,  lo!  the  ground 
around  them  quakes  under  their  feet;2  the 

Matt.  axvm.  2.  1 

ver.2.  angel  of  the  Lord  descends  from  heaven  :  the 

Ver.i.  °  , 

heathen  watchers  at  the  tomb  fall  prostrate 
with  fear  as  the  glory  of  that  celestial  appearance  smites 
upon  their  eyes ;  the  great  stone  is  rolled  away  from  the 
already  empty  sepulchre;3  men  now  may  perceive  what 
angels  know,  that  the  Lord  is  risen.  Meanwhile  the 
women,  who  probably  were  still  too  distant  to  see  dis- 
tinctly, perhaps  pause,  bewildered  and  irresolute,  doubtful 

Biblioth.  Sacra,  Vol.  ii.  p.  168,  where  examples  are  given  from  the  Septuagint 
which  dilute  the  objection  arising  from  the  use  of  the  aorist. 

1  This,  as  has  already  been  suggested  (p.  327,  note  3),  is  perhaps  to  be  inferred 
from  the  T)pyi.£vov  4k  tou  iu.vrnj.eiov  of  John  xx.  1,  the  preposition  seeming  to 
imply  that  the  stone  was  not  only  rolled  against  the  door,  but  fitted  into  the 
cavity. 

2  It  is  very  difficult  to  decide  whether  the  women  actually  beheld  the  miracu- 
lous circumstances  mentioned  Matt,  xxviii.  1  si).,  or  not.  The  definite  expres- 
sion, /red  ISov  (ver.  2),  the  address  of  the  angel  (ver.  5),  and  the  contrasting  v/u.e7s 
(ver.  5;  compare  Chrys.  in  loc),  seem  most  distinctly  in  favor  of  the  affirmative, 
while  the  silence  of  the  other  Evangelists,  and  even  St.  Matthew's  very  indirect 
notice  of  the  impression  produced  on  the  women  by  the  wondrous  sight,  strongly 
suggest  the  negative.  In  this  difficulty  the  mediating  view  of  the  text,  that 
they  beheld  it  partially  and  at  a  distance,  has  been  adopted  as  in  some  degree 
reconciling  the  two  impressions  produced  by  a  consideration  of  this  portion  of 
the  narrative.  The  terrified  guards  would  also  probably  have  been  unable  to 
have  wholly  suppressed  some  account  of  an  event  (Matt,  xxviii.  13)  which  so 
greatly  terrified  them,  and  thus,  partly  from  them  and  partly  from  the  women, 
the  occurrence  would  have  become  gradually  but  completely  known. 

3  The  exact  moment  when  the  Lord  issued  from  the  tomb  is  left  wholly  unde- 
fined. The  prevailing  view  of  the  early  writers  is  that  it  preceded  the  events 
specified  by  the  Evangelist  (|ueTa  rr/u  wacnaaw  j)\htv  ayye\os,  Chrysost.  in 
Matt,  xxviii.  1),  and  that  the  appearance  of  the  angel  and  removal  of  the  stone 
were  to  announce  what  had  already  taken  place  and  to  demonstrate  its  reality. 
Comp.  Ilacket,  Serm.  v.  on  Resnrr.  p.  592  sq.  (Lond.  1G75).  All  we  can  know  of 
the  circumstances  of  the  holy  mystery  is  to  be  gathered  from  John  xx.  6  sq.; 
from  which  we  may  perhaps  presume  to  say  that  it  took  place  with  all  the 
adjuncts  of  holy  order,  deliberation,  and  peace.  Comp.  Robinson,  Bibl.  Sacra, 
Vol.  ii.  p.  166. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY  DAYS.  341 

whether  to  go  onward  or  to  return.  But  all  is  now  again 
the  wonted  eulm  of  early  dawn ;  the  earth  has  ceased  to 
tremble;  the  strange  flashing  light  has  faded  away;  they 
will  yet  pursue  their  way;  they  will  enter  the  quiet  gar- 
den ;  they  will  strive  to  find  entrance  into  the  tomb;  they 
will  do  that  for  which  they  are  come.  As  they  draw  nearer, 
they  see  to  their  joy  that  the  stone  is  rolled  away,  resting 
perhaps  on  one  side  of  the  rocky  portal;1  they  take  heart 
and  press  onward;  yea,  they  enter,  as  St.  Luke 

11  •  i  i     >  i  r>  ii  i  *-7'-  xxiv-  3. 

tells  us,  into  the  tomb  itself,  and  by  the  see- 
ing of  the  eye  are  assured  that  the  holy  body  they  them- 
selves  had   beheld  securely  laid   there  is  now  there  no 
longer.     The  tomb  is  empty ;  they  have  searched  and  have 
not  found,  and  now  stand  sadly  gazing  on  each  other  in 
utter  bewilderment  and  perplexity.    But  one 
there  was  among  them  more  rapid  in  the  in- 
ferences of  her  fears,  and  more  prompt  in  action.     Ere,  as 
it  would  seem,  the  rest  had  entered  the  sepulchre  and  com- 
menced their  search,  Mary  Magdalene  was  already  on  her 
way  to  Jerusalem.2    She  who  owed  to  Him 

i  -i  •      i  st     i  i  n  -i  o  Lu}:e  viiim  %• 

that  died  on  Golgotha  a  freedom  from  a  state 

worse  than  death,  and  who  loved  even  as  she  had  been 


1  Some  little  difficulty  lias  been  felt  in  the  clause  %v  yap  /xtyas  ff(p68pa  (Mark 
xvi.  4),  as  it  might  seem  rather  to  give  a  reason  why  the  women  meditated  how 
the  stone  should  be  removed,  than  why  they  perceive  that  what  they  mused  on 
had  happened.  If,  however,  we  make  the  assumption  in  the  text,  or  some  simi- 
lar one,  as  to  the  position  of  the  stone,  all  seems  clear;  while  the  women  are  yet 
at  a  little  distance  they  perceive  that  the  stone  is  not  in  its  place,  it  being  of  large 
size,  and  its  changed  position  readily  seen.  This  harmonizes  with  the  supposition 
thai  -Mary  Magdalene  went  away  first,  and  at  once.  Compare  John  xx.  1,  2, 
/3A.«7T6«  k.  t.  A.  Tpe'xe*  oiv  k.  r.  A..,  where  the  oiv  must  not  be  left  unnoticed. 

2  The  common  supposition  is  that  Mary  ran  first  to  the  sepulchre,  without 
wailing  for  the  rest;  to  this,  however,  there  are  objections  arising  from  the  fact 
that  St.  Matthew  specifies  that  there  was  at  least  another  with  her  when  she 
went  ifh.  xxviii.  1),  and  that  St.  Luke  implies  that  she  acted  in  some  degree  of 
conceit  with  the  other  women.  Compare  Wieselcr,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  430,  and 
see  below,  p.  842,  note  2.  The  primary  difficulty  that  St.  John  names  no  other 
woman  than  Mary,  must  be  cut.  if  not  solved,  by  the  reasonable  assertion  that 
St.  John  was  moved  to  notice  her  case  particularly,  and  by  the  fair  principle  of 
Lc  Clerc,  which  so  often  claims  our  recognition  in  this  part  of  the  inspired  nar- 
rative,—  "qui  plura  narrat,  pauoiora  compleotiturj  qui  pandora  memorat, plum 
noii  negat." — Harmon,  p.  625,  Can.  m.  flu.  (cited  by  Kobinson). 

29* 


342  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

blessed,  no  sooner  beholds  the  stone  removed  from  the 
doorway  of  her  Lord's  resting-place  than  she  sees,  or  seems 
to  see,  all.  She  whose  whole  present  thought  was  only 
how  she  might  do  honor  to  her  Master's  body,  how  best 
strew  the  spices  around  the  holy  body,  how  most  tenderly 
spread  the  ointment  on  the  sacred  temples  of  the  sleeping 
head,  now  at  a  glance  perceives  that  others  have  been 
before  her;  she  sees  it,  and  at  once  fears  the  worst,  —  her 
Lord's  sepulchre  violated,  His  holy  body  borne  away  to 
some  dishonored  grave,1  or  exposed  to  shame  and  indigni- 
ties which  it  was  fearful  even  to  think  of.  Help  and  coun- 
sel must  at  once  be  sought,  and  that  of  a  more  effectual 
kind  than  weak  women  could  provide.  Perhaps,  with  a 
few  hasty  words  to  those  around,2  she  runs 
with  all  speed  to  the  Lord's  most  chosen  fol- 
lowers, Peter  and  John,  and  in  artless  language,  which 
incidentally  shows  that  she  had  not  been  the  sole  visitant 
of  the  tomb,®  at  once  tells  them  the  mournful  tidings,  — 
"  They  have  taken  away  the  Lord  out  of  the 
sepulchre,  and  we  know  not  where  they  have 
laid  Him."     The  two  Apostles  promptly  attend   to  the 


1  See  above,  p.  326,  note  3. 

2  This  supposition,  though  not  positively  required  by  any  of  the  succeeding 
incidents,  is  still  hazarded,  as  serving  to  indicate  how  it  might  have  happened 
that  the  women  did  not  meet  St.  Peter  as  he  was  coming  up  to  the  sepulchre. 
Knowing  that  one  of  their  party  had  gone  to  him,  the  women  possibly  went  off 
in  different  directions  to  the  abodes  of  the  other  Apostles.  Though  they  were 
all  assembled  together  in  the  evening  (Luke  xxiv.  36,  John  xx.  19),  it  does  not 
follow  that  they  were  now  all  occupying  a  common  abode.  Comp.  Griesbach, 
Opusc.  Acad.  Vol.  ii.  p.  243.  If  further  conjectures  are  worth  making,  it  does 
seem  wholly  improbable  that  St.  Peter  might  have  been  now  in  the  abode  that 
contained  St.  John  and  the  Virgin  (John  xix.  27).  The  psychological  truth  in 
Mary's  running  for  help  to  men  is  noticed  by  Luthardt,  Johann.  Evang.  Part  II. 
p.  435.  It  is,  however,  quite  as  useful  in  illustrating  the  reason  why  Mary  did 
not  remain  with  those  unable  to  help,  as  why  (on  Luthardt's  hypothesis)  she  did 
not  run  back  to  them. 

3  This  deduction  from  the  plural  oVBafAev  (John  xx.  3)  is  objected  to  by  Meyer 
(in  loc),  who  urges  the  oI5a  (ver.  13)  as  fully  counterbalancing  the  plural  in  the 
present  case.  This  does  not  seem  satisfactory.  The  first  statement  was  made 
under  different  feelings  to  the  second ;  now  she  had  but  lately  left  others,  and 
speaks  under  the  natural  consciousness  of  the  fact;  afterwards  she  feels  left 
alone  in  her  sorrow,  and  speaks  accordingly.    See  below,  p.  346,  note  2. 


Lect.  vrrr.  the  forty  days.  843 

message  and  hasten  to  the  sepulchre,  followed,  as  it  would 
seem,  by  her  who  brought  the  tidings,  and 
who,  it  appears  from  the  context,  must  have         J£ 
arrived  there  not  long  afterwards. 

Ere,  however,  the  two  Apostles  had  reached  the  tomb, 
other  messengers,  filled  indeed  with  an  awe 

,  i      i      i      •      i  •  The  appearance 

and  amazement  that  sealed  their  lips  to  every     aftheangeu  to  the 

i  .ii.     /Mil       i  '.i  t„       women  <u  tiu  MP- 

one  they  met,1  but  rilled  also  with   a  deep  ulch,.e_ 

feeling  of  holy  joy  that  quickened  their  steps  %*?'£x*"'6' 

to  the  city,  were  now  seeking  out  the  rest  of 

the  eleven.     Shortly  after  Mary  Magdalene  had  left  the 

other  ministering  women,  and  while,  as  it  would  seem,  they 

were  standing  bewildered  in  the  tomb,  two 

or,  as   some    of  these    perturbed   beholders  /&. 

might  have  specified,2  one  of  the  heavenly  *«*    «*    r>- 

c  ,        .  comp.  Mutt,  xxviii. 

host,  announce  to  them  that  the  Lord  is  risen,  5. 

and  bid  them  with  all  speed  convey  the  tid-  Matt.tacvHS.7. 

ings  to  the  Apostles,  and  tell  them  that  the  ver.7. Markxoi. 

risen   Shepherd  gocth  before  His  flock3  to  7- 

(Jalilee,  even   as  He  had  solemnly  promised  ch.  win.  s. 

/.XT-  •  Mark  xvi.  10. 

three  days  before  on  the  eve  of  His  passion. 

The  message,  we  know,  was  speedily  delivered ;  the  weep- 

1  It  seems  unreasonable  in  Meyer  {on  Marl:  xvi.  8)  and  others  to  press  the 
ovStvl  ovblv  (Ittov  of  the  second  Evangelist,  as  implying  that  the  women  did 
not  obey  the  angel's  command,  and  that  it  was  only  afterwards  that  they  men- 
tions! it.  Siiiily  it  is  reasonable  on  psychological  grounds  (to  borrow  a  favor- 
ite mode  of  argument  in  modern  writers)  to  think  that  the  women  would  not, 
Individually,  much  less  collectively,  disobey  a  command  of  such  a  kind,  and 
uttered  by  such  a  speaker.  Fear  sealed  their  lips  to  chance-met  passers  to  and 
fro,  but  joy  (Matt,  xxviii.  8)  opened  them  freely  enough  to  the  Apostles. 

i  The  question  of  the  number  of  the  angels  present  at  the  sepulchre  possibly 
admits  of  some  sort  of  explanation  similar  to  those  already  adopted  in  not 
unlike  eases  (p.  ITS.  note  2;  p.  251,  note  1),  and  founded  on  the  assumption  that 
our  was  the  chief  speaker,  and  that  to  him  attention  was  particularly  directed. 
It  is  however,  perhaps  more  probable  that  in  the  present  case  the  difference  is 
to  be  referred  to  the  special  excitement  of  the  time,  and  the  perturbed  state  of 
the  observers  (Luke  xxiv.  5).  Compare  Stier,  Disc,  of  oar  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  03 
(Clark). 

3  The  term  irpodyd  (Matt,  xxviii.  7,  Mark  xvi.  7)  Is  rightly  explained  by  Stier 
and  others  as  indicating,  not  b  mere  precedence  in  reference  to  the  time  of 

going,  but  BS  marking  the  attitude  of  the  risen  Lord  to  His  now  partly  scattered 

flock.    Observe  the  connection  in  Matt.  xxvi.  oi  Bq.,  and  Mark  xi\ .  27  sq. 


344  THE  FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  YIII. 

ing  and  desolate  Apostles1  were  sought  out  and  told  the 
cheering  tidings,  but  their  sorrow  clouded  their  faith ;  the 
words  of  the  excited  messengers  seemed  foolishness  unto 
them,  and  they  believed  them  not.  Sad- 
dened,  perhaps,  and  grieved  that  they  could 
not  persuade  those  to  whom  they  were  sent,  yet  strong 
in  a  faith  that  was  soon  to  receive  its  exceeding  great 
reward,  the  women  appear  to  have  turned  backward  again2 
toward  the  one  spot  in  the  world  on  which  their  thoughts 
now  were  fixed  —  their  Master's  tomb. 

Let   us,   however,  turn   back   for   a  moment   to   Mary 
Magdalene    and    the   two   Apostles.      They 

a™Vto,^?P°StleS       WGre    n0W    a11    thl'ee    at    tlie    t0mb-        St-    J°lm 

had  reached   it  first,  but  with  the   feelings 

of  a  holy  awe  had  not  presumed  to  enter  his  Master's 

tomb,  though  he   had   seen  enough   to  feel 

Toimxx.5.  half   convinced   that    Mary's    tidings   were 

Ver.5.  .       ° 

Ver  &  true.      St.  Peter  follows,   and  with  charac- 

teristic   promptness   enters    the   tomb,   and 
steadily  surveys3  its  state,  and  the  position  of  the  grave- 

1  The  graphic  comment  on  the  state  of  the  Apostles  when  Mary  Magdalene 
brought  her  message  airriyyetAep  rots  /ast'  ainoii  ytvofxtvots,  irev&ovaiv 
K  al  KXaiovaiv  (Mark  xvi.  10),  seems  justly  to  outweigh  all  the  petty  excep- 
tions that  have  been  taken  by  Meyer  and  others  to  some  expressions  in  this  verse 
(e/ceiVrj,  used  without  emphasis;  Tropev&elffa,  -rots  /tier'  avrov  ytvofxeyois,  instead 
of  to?s  fj.a&rjTa?s  avrov)  which  are  urged  as  foreign  to  St.  Mark's  style.  If  the 
hypothesis  already  advanced  (p.  40,  note  1)  be  accepted,  viz.,  that  St.  Mark 
added  this  portion  at  a  later  period,  we  only  here  meet  exactly  with  what  we 
might  have  expected,  identity  in  leading  characteristics,  change  in  details  of 
language. 

2  It  seems  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  women  would  return  to  the  sepulchre. 
They  left  it  in  great  precipitation  (((pvyou,  Mark  xvi.  8),  and  would  naturally  go 
back  again,  if  not  for  the  lower  purpose  of  fetching  what  they  might  have  left 
there,  yet  for  the  higher  one  of  gaining  some  further  knowledge  of  a  mystery 
which  even  Apostles  refused  to  believe.  Compare,  thus  far,  Wieseler,  Chron. 
Synops.  p.  425  sq. 

3  The  verb  Seo>pe?i>,  though  frequently  used  by  St.  John  (above  twenty  times), 
seems  in  the  present  case  (&ta.'pt7  ra  6$6i>ia  Kel^iei/a,  k.  t.  \.  ch.  xx.  C),  as  indeed 
commonly  elsewhere,  to  mark  the  steady  contemplation  ("ipsius  aninii  inten- 
tionem  denotat  qua  quis  intuetur  quidquam."  Tittm.)  with  which  anything  is 
regarded  by  an  interested  observer;  a-xavra.  Karwrnsvatv  aKptficis,  Chrys.  See 
the  good  comments  on  this  word  in  Tittmann,  Si/non.  Xor.  Test.  p.  120  sq.  The 
remark  of  Stier  is  perhaps  not  wholly  fanciful,  that  the  visibility  of  angels   is 


Lect.  VIII.  THE    FORTY   DAYS.  345 

clothes.  Wh.it  his  exact  feelings  then  were  we  know  not, 
though  we  know  those  of  his  brother  Apostle  who  now 
cut cied  into  the  tomb.  He  too  saw  the  position  of  the 
grave-clothes,  the  swath ing-ba ml s  by  themselves  in  one 
part  of  the  tomb,  the  folded   napkin  in  the 

1  '  l  Vcr.7. 

other,  every  sign  of  order  and  none  of  con- 
fusion,1 and  he  who  had  perhaps  before  believed  that  the 
tomb  was  empty,  now  believes,  what  a  true  knowledge  of 
tin'  Scriptures  might  have  taught  him  at  first,  that  the 
Lord  is  risen.-  Consoled,  and  elevated  in  thought  and 
hope,  the  two  Apostles  turn  backward  to  their  own  home.3 
.Meanwhile  Mary  Magdalene  had  now  returned  to  the 
tomb,  though,  as  we  must  conclude  from  the  context,  wilh- 


dependent  upon  the  existing  wakefulness  or  susceptibility  of  the  beholding  eye, 
and  that  thus  the  investigating  Apostles  did  not  see  them,  while  to  the  rapt  and 
longing  Mary  they  became  apparent.  See  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  68,  and 
comp.  the  somewhat  similar  but  overconfidently  expressed  "canon"  of  LUcke, 
( | ,i,ii,i  nt.  ub.  .Ink.  Vol.  ii.  p.  781  (ed.  3). 

1  The  position  of  the  grave-clothes  is  specially  noticed  as  showing  clearly  that 
there  had  been  no  violation  of  the  tomb:  '•  inde  patebat,  ilium  qui  statum  sejiul- 
Ohri  inutaverat.  quicuiique  tandem  fuerit,  nihil  festinanter  egisse  .  .  .  sed  studio 
et  com  certo  cousilio  lintea  corpori  detraxissc,  et  concinno  online  in  diversis 
locifl  reposuisse."  —  Lunipe,  in  loc,  cited  by  Luthardt,  p.  430.  On  the  further 
deductions  from  this  passage  (8ti  ovk  1\v  (TirevSouToiv  ov5e  ^opv^oufiii/wu  to 
■n-pay/ia,  Chrys.)  see  above,  p.  340,  note  3. 

2  The  exact  meaning  of  iirloTewrev  (John  xx.  8)  is  somewhat  doubtful.  Are 
we  to  understand  by  it  merely  that  the  Apostle  believed  in  Mary's  report  (-'quod 
dixerat  mulier,  cum  de  monumento  esse  sublatum,"  August,  in  Joarm.  Tractat. 
cxix.).  or,  in  accordance  with  the  usual  and  deeper  meaning  of  the  word,  that 
he  believed  in  the  religions  truth,  viz.,  of  the  resarrection  (TJj  avaff-racrzi,  tiria- 
rewaf,  Chrys.)?  Certainly,  as  it  would  seem,  the  latter.  The  ground  of  the 
belief  was  the  position  of  the  grave-clothes,  which  was  inconsistent  with  the 
Supposition  of  a  removal  of  the  body  by  enemies;  anb  tt)s  t£>v  b^tov'nnv  avWo- 
yris  ivvovo-i  ti>  avdaraatu,  Cyril.  Alex,  in  Joann.  Vol.  iv.  p.  107*  (ed.  Anbert). 
The  supposed  difficulty  in  the  yap  of  the  succeeding  member  seems  removed  by 
the  gloss  adopted  above  in  the  text.  St.  John  BOW  and  believed  (eTSfc  /ecu  hria- 
rtvatv):  but  had  he  known  the  Scripture  he  would  not  have  required  the  evi- 
dence by  which  he  had  become  convinced.  Compare  Robinson,  liiblioih.  Sacr. 
Vol.  ii.  p.  174. 

3  The  expression  air?)A&oi/  irpbs  abrobt  {John  xx.  10)  seems  rightly  paraphrased 
by  Euthymius,  atrqA&OP, —  irpbs  r))v  kavron/  Ka.Tayaiyr\v.  So.  similarly,  Luke 
xxiv.  12.  The  two  disciples  returned  to  the  places,  or  perhaps  rather  place  (see 
above,  p. 842,  note  2),  where  they  were  abiding, to  meditate  upon  the  amazing 
miracle  (compare  Luke  xxiv.  12);  very  soon  afterwards,  as  we  must  infer  from 
Luke  xxiv.  24,  they  communicated  it  to  the  rest  of  the  Apostles  and  the  other 

brethren. 


346  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lkct.  VIII. 

out  having  again  met  the  two  Apostles,  who  would  other- 
wise have  cheered  her  with  the  hopes  they 

The     Lord's   ap-  m 

pearance  to  iiwy     themselves   were   feeling,  and   imparted   to 

Jlai/dalciie.  _       ,      .  .       . 

her  some  share    ot   their   own   convictions. 
But  she  was  now  standing  weeping  bv  the 

John  SCX.  11.  ITT-  1       1    1  1  T  1 

tomb,  unconsoled  and  inconsolable;  her  Lord 
was  borne  away,  and  she  knew  not  where  he  was  laid :  was 
not  that  cause  sufficient  for  those  bitter  tears?  Yet  she 
will  gaze  at  least  into  that  quiet  resting-place  that  once 
had  contained  her  Lord  and   Saviour;  she  will  gaze  in, 

thouo-h  she  fears  to  enter.    The  fourth  Evan- 

Ch.  xx.  12. 

gelist  has  told  us  what  she  saw,  —  two  angels 

as  in  attitude  of  still  watching  over  Him  who  had  but  so 

lately  lain  there.1      They  ask  her  why  she 

John  xx.  13.  , 

weeps.     She  has  but  one  answer,  the  same 

artless  words  she  uttered  to  the  two  Apostles,  varied  only 

by  a  slight  change  of  person,  that  seems  to 

tell  of  an  utter  grief  and  perplexity  with 

which  she  feels  herself  now  left  to  struggle  unsustained 

and  alone.2   Yea,  she  turns  away,  as  it  would 

seem,  even  from  angelic  sympathy.     But  she 

turns  to  see,  perhaps,  now  standing  in  some  position  in 

which  immediate  recognition  was  less  easy,3  One  whom 

1  There  seems  something  more  than  arbitrary  fancy  (Meyer)  in  the  idea  alluded 
to  in  the  text.  The  attitude  of  the  angels,  thus  specially  mentioned  by  the 
Apostle,  was  so  explained  by  some  of  the  best  early  commentators  (o-ruxaivovres 
ws  ovk  &f  7|SiKT)<re  tis  to  ayiov  <rwp,a,  Cyril  Alex,  in  toe.),  and  has  been  rightly 
so  understood  by  some  of  the  better  modern  interpreters.  See  Luthardt,  das 
Johann.  Evang.  Tart  II.  p.  438,  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  58  (Clark). 

-•  As  has  been  already  observed  (p.  342.  note  3),  the  present  otSa  (John  xx.  13) 
of  the  solitary  mourner  is  not  to  be  regarded  as  simply  synonymous  with  o?5at.uv 
(ver.  2).  Here,  as  the  context  shows,  the  woman  is  standing  alone  by  the  tomb; 
the  Apostles  have  gone  away;  she  feels  herself  unsupported  in  her  grief,  and  she 
thus  naturally  expresses  it.  Comp.  ver.  15,  where  the  first  person  is  similarly 
continued. 

■1  Tt  is  not,  at  first  sight,  easy  to  understand  why  Mary  did  not  at  once  recognize 
our  Lord,  as  we  have  no  reason  for  thinking  from  the  context  that  her  eyes  were 
ppeeially  holden  (contrast  Luke  xxiv.  16),  and  every  reason  for  rejecting  the  idea 
of  some  interpreters  that  the  Lord's  recent  sufferings  had  left  His  features  unrec- 
ognizable, The  natural  explanation  would  seem  to  be  this,  — that  she  was  so 
absorbed  in  her  sorrow,  and  so  utterly  without  hope  or  expectancy  of  Mich  a 


Lect.  VIII.  TIIE   FORTY   DAYS.  347 

she  knew  not,  nay,  whose  very  voice  either  she  did  not  or 
could  not  recognize,  until  her  slumbering  con- 
sciousness is  awakened  by  hearing  her  own 
name  uttered,  and  that,  as  we  may  presume  to  think,  in 
accents  that  in  a  moment  revealed  all.1  Amazement,  hope, 
belief,  conviction,  all  in  their  fullest  measures,  burst,  as  it 
were,  upon   her  soul.     With  the  one  word 

;  John  XX.  16. 

Kabboni,   and,   as  the   context   leads    us  to 
think,  with  some  gesture  of  overwhelming  and  bewildered 
joy,  she  turns  round  as  if  to  satisfy  herself,  not  only  by  the 
eye  and  ear,  but  by  the  touch  of  the  clasping  hand,  that  it 
was  indeed  lie  Himself,2  no  mere  heaven-sent  form,  but 
her  Teacher  and  Deliverer,  whose  feet  she  had  been  per- 
mitted to  follow  over  the  hills  of  Galilee, 
whose  power  had  rescued  her,  and   whose 
redeeming  blood  she  had  seen  falling  on  the  very  ground 
nigh  to   which    she   then  was   standing.      Yea,   her   out- 
stretched hand  shall  assure  her  that  it  is  her  Lord.     But  it 


blessing,  that  slie  speaks  to,  and  perhaps  even  generally  looks  at  the  supposed 
Stranger  without  recognizing  Him,  Compare  the  illustrative  anecdote  in  Slur- 
lock's  able  tract,  The  Trial  of  Witnesses,  Vol.  v.  p.  195  (ed.  Hughes).  It  ma;  be 
also  further  remarked,  that  if  any  knowledge  of  the  exact  locality  had  lion 
vouchsafed  to  us,  further  explanation  would  probably  be  found  in  the  taTpdcpr) 
els  Tot  biriaw,  vcr.  14.  Into  the  question  of  clothing  (comp.  Stier,  Disc.  Vol. 
viii.  j).  88,  note)  it  is  idle  and  indeed  presumptuous  to  enter.  Whatsoever  garb 
our  Lord's  wisdom  thought  fit,  that  did  His  power  assume. 

1  It  seems  natural  to  think  that  besides  the  mere  utterance  of  her  name  there 
was  something  also  in  the  intonation  that  so  vividly  recalled  the  holy  privileges 
of  past  Intercourse  and  past  teaching,  that  Mary  not  only  at  once  recognizes  her 
Lord,  but,  by  the  very  title  with  which  she  addresses  Him,  shows  how  fully  she 
reverts  to  previous  relations,  and  as  yet  to  nothing  higher.  Contrast  John  xx. 
28,  and  compare  Luthardt,  das  Johann.  Evang.  Tart  ii.  p.  139.  The  single  word 
"  Kabboni,*'  if  properly  weighed,  will  be  found  to  throw  considerable  light  on 
the  next  verse.    Compare  Backet,  Serm.  viii.  on,  Ilesurr.  p.  C19. 

'i  "The  supposition  of  Lamy,  and,  more  recently,  of  Meyer,  that  Mary  Magda- 
lene soughi  to  convince  herself  of  the  reality  of  the  divine  Form  that  stood  be- 
fore her,  i-  apparently  reasonable  and  natural,  but  when  pushed  further  as  the 
■ole  explanation  of  the  yap  of  the  following  clause  ("you  need  not  convince 
yourself  by  touch,  I  am  not  yet  a  glorified  spirit:"  com]).  Kinkel  in  Biblioth. 
Sacra,  Vol.  i.  p.  168),  seems  utterly  lacking  and  unsatisfactory.  A  desire  to  Sat- 
isfy herself  was  probably  in  the   mind  of  the  speaker,  but   there  were  other  feel- 

ii  .-,  half  disclosed  in  the  Kabboni,  to  winch  the  Lord's  words  were  more  espe- 
cially intended  to  refer.     Compare  Andrewes, Serm   XV.  Vol.  iii.  p.  30  (A.-C.  L.). 


348  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

must  not  be ;  relations  now  are  solemnly  changed.  That 
holy  body  is  the  resurrection  body  of  the  ascending  Lord  ; 
the  eager  touch  of  a  mere  earthly  love  is  now  more  than 
ever  unbecoming  and  unmeet.  With  mysterious  words 
full  of  holy  dignity  and  majesty,  yet  at  the  same  time  of 
most  tenderly  implied  consolation,1  the  Lord  bids  her 
refrain.  The  time  indeed  will  come  when,  under  higher 
relations,  love,  eager  and  demonstrative  as  that  now  shown 
to  the  risen,  may  hei*eafter  unforbiddenly  direct  itself  to 
the  ascended  Lord.  But  that  time  is  not  now.  Still  love 
devoted  and  true  as  that  displayed  by  Mary  of  Magdala 
shall  not  be  left  unblessed.2  To  her  is  vouchsafed  the 
privilege  of  being  the  first  mortal  preacher  of  the  risen 
Lord.     From  her  lips  is  it  that  even  Apos- 

John  xx.  17.  *  *• 

ties  are  to  learn  not  only  that  the  resurrec- 
tion is  past,  but  that  the  ascension  is  begun,  and  that  He 


1  In  the  very  difficult  words  M^  /xov  amov  k.  t.  A.  (John  xx.  17)  two  things 
seem  clearly  implied:  (1)  a  solemn  declaration  of  changed  relations  of  inter- 
course with  the  risen  Lord,  expressed  in  the  prohibitory  yu.?)  fxov  cLttov;  (2)  a 
consolatory  assurance  that  what  is  prohibited  now  shall  (in  another  form)  be 
vouchsafed  hereafter.  The  Greek  expositors  are  thus  perfectly  right  when  they 
recognize  in  the  words  the  holy  dignity  of  the  risen  Lord  (avdyft  airrrjs  ttjV 
Stduoiay,  (bare  alSeai/xdrepou  avra)  irpo(r4x*iv,  Chrys.),  which,  to  use  the  words 
of  Stier,  "  withdraws  sublimely  from  a  too  human  touch;"  but  they  fail,  for 
the  most  part,  in  the  second  member,  and  either  miss  or  neglect  the  full  force  of 
the  ydp.  This  must  certainly  be  preserved,  as  involving  a  consolatory  reason  for 
the  present  prohibition  (l'hotius),  and  as  giving  the  necessary  divine  fulness  to 
these  first  words  of  the  risen  Saviour.  The  whole  meaning,  then,  may  be  briefly 
expressed  in  the  following  paraphrase:  —  "  Touch  me  not  (with  this  touch  of  the 
past),  for  I  have  not  yet  entered  into  those  relations  in  which  I  may  truly  be 
touched,  though  it  will  be  with  the  equally  loving  but  necessarily  more  reverent 
and  spiritual  touch  of  the  future."  For  further  details,  see  especially  the  excel- 
lent and  exhaustive  sermon  of  Andrewes,  Serm.  xx.  Vol.  iii.  p.  23  sq.  (A.-C.  L.), 
Meyer,  Komment.  ub.  Joh.  p.  499  sq.,  LUcke,  ib.  Vol.  ii.  p.  783  sq.,  Stier,  Disc,  of 
our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  67  sq. ;  and  compare  Robinson  in  Biblioth.  Sacr.  Vol. 
viii.  p.  175. 

2  It  seems  right  to  recognize  in  the  avafSaivw  (ver.  17)  a  reference  to  the  aua- 
/3f/37j/ca  of  the  preceding  member,  and  in  the  5e  that  sort  of  latent  opposition 
(Klotz,  Devar.  Vol.  ii.  p.  3C2)  which  seems  to  imply  that  the  member  it  intro- 
duces involves  contrasts  to  what  precedes;  —  "I  have  not  yet  ascended;  but 
delay  not,  go  thy  way  and  deliver  the  message,  that  my  resurrection  has  really 
practically  commenced."  See  above,  p.  338,  note  3,  and  compare  Andrewes, 
Serm.  Vol.  iii.  46. 


Lect.  VIII.  TIIE  FORTY   DAYS.  349 

■who  "is  not  ashamed  to  call  them1  brethren"  is  now  as- 
cending to  His  Father  and  to  their  Father, 

.  ihb.  I.,  n. 

and  to  His  God  and  their  God. 

What  exact  effect  was  produced  on  the  minds  of  the 
Apostles  by  a  message  thus  clear  and  cir- 
cumstantial, we  cannot  fully  tell.     From  the    JSHStm^ 
second  Evangelist  it   would  certainly  seem     2££**»  *» Mar^* 

~  •>  tidings. 

clear  that  no  credence  was  given  to  Mary's 

declaration  that  the  Lord  was  alive  again,  and  that  her 

own  eves  had  seen  Him.     This,  at  any  rate, 

,  Mark  xvi.  11. 

they  did  not  and  could  not  believe.  They 
had  but  lately,  as  it  would  seem,  heard  strange  tidings 
from  the  women,  and  they  might  possibly  have  come  to 
the  belief  that  a  part  at  least  of  these  tidings  was  true.2 
But  the  Lord  Himself  no  eye  had  seen  ;3  nay,  the  very 
removal  of  the  bodv,  which  might  have  been   admitted 


1  Most  commentators  have  rightly  called  attention  to  our  Lord's  present  use 
of  the  term  ••  brethren"'  (John  xx.  17)  in  reference  to  the  Apostles,  though  they 
differ  in  their  estimate  of  the  exact  sentiment  it  seems  intended  to  convey.  The 
most  natural  view  seems  that  of  Euthymins,  that  it  was  indirectly  to  assure  the 
disciples  that  the  Lord  was  still  truly  man,  and  still  stood,  in  this  respect,  on  the 
same  relations  with  them  as  before:  '•  lie  named  them  brethren,  as  being  him- 
self a  man,  and  their  kinsman  according  to  man's  nature."  —  In  Joann.  xx.  17, 
Vol.  iii.  p.  635. 

2  The  exact  amount  of  information  of  what  had  taken  place  which  the  Apostles 
had  up  to  this  time  received,  and  their  present  state  of  feeling,  can  only  be  gener- 
ally surmised.  All  we  know  certainly  is  that  they  had  received  the  first  tidings 
of  the  women  and  regarded  them  as  "idle  tales"  (Luke  xxiv.  11).  It  is  indeed 
possible  that,  previous  to  the  arrival  of  Mary  Magdalene,  some  of  them  might 
have  learnt  from  St.  Peter  and  St.  John,  or  from  those  to  whom  those  Apostles 
might  have  mentioned  it,  "  that  the  body  was  not  in  the  sepulchre  "  (comp.  Luke 
XXiv.  28) J  the  probable  shortness  of  time,  however,  between  the  departure  of 
the  two  Apostles  and  the  second  departure  of  Mary,  and  the  improbability  of 
the  supposition  that  the  disciples  were  already  all  assembled  together  (see  above, 
p.  312,  note  2),  render  it  natural  to  think  that  not  much  more  could  be  generally 
known  that  had  been  communicated  by  the  first  women. 

Even  it  \\e  adopt  the  supposition  alluded  to  in  the  preceding  note,  and  con- 
ceive the  results  of  the  visit  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  to  have  been  now  known 
to  the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  it  still  seems  clear  that  any  account  of  an  actual  visi- 
ble  appearance  of  our  Lord  would  have  been  regarded  little  less  incredible  than 
before.  The  two  travellers  to  Emmaus,  though  probably  starting  at  a  time  (see 
below)  when  more  would  bare  been  known, speak  of  the  confirmation  which 
tli-  report  of  the  women  had  received,  but  add  the  melancholy  conviction  of  the 
disciples  generally,  aWlf  6«  ouk  «(5of,  Luke  xxiv.  24. 

;30 


350  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  Till. 

and  believed  in,  served  perhaps  only  to  confirm  the  vague 
feeling  that  now  all  trace  was  forever  lost ;  that  the  angels 
of  which  the  women  had  spoken  had  borne  away  the  holy 

body  to  some  sepulchre  unknown  as  that  of 

Moses  ;  and  that  the  dream  of  any  earthly 
union  was  more  than  ever  impossible  and  unimaginable. 

The  vision  of  angels  they  perhaps  had  now 
joomp.Lvkexxiv.     DegUn  partially  to  believe  in,1  but  that  their 

Lord  had  been  seen  by  the  excited  woman 
that  now  stood  before  them,  that  He  had  spoken  with  her, 
and  made  her  the  bearer  of  a  message,  was  a  dream  and 
a  hallucination  too  wild  to  deserve  even  a  moment's 
attention. 

But  they  were  soon  to  receive  yet  further  and  fuller 

testimony.     Hitherto   those  that   had   come 
ne  lorcrs  ap-     t     them  could  speak  only  from  the   seeing 

peurance     to     the  I  J  o 

other      ministering        Qf  ftlQ     eVe  '     OtheVS     Wei'g    DOW    tO     COtlie     W'ho 

women.  J 

could  plead  the  evidence  of  another  sense, 
and  could  tell  not  only  of  what  their  eyes  had  seen  but 
their  "hands  handled."  Very  shortly,  perhaps,  after  Mary 
Magdalene  had  left  the  Apostles,2  the   other  ministering 

women,  who  had  brought  the  first  tidings  to 

Matt.xxviii.O.  ,  °  .  _  -,      . 

the  Apostles,  are  permitted  to  meet  then- 
Lord  face  to  face,  yea,  and  to  clasp  the  holy  feet  before 


1  After  the  intelligence  brought  by  Maty  Magdalene,  the  Apostles  might  have 
been  led  to  believe  that  the  tomb  really  was  empty,  and,  further,  that  marvellous 
things  had  been  seen  (comp.  Luke  xxiv.  23);  but  more  than  this,  it  seems  certain, 
•was  not  believed  by  any  except  by  St.  John.  On  the  slowness  of  the  Apostles 
to  believe,  see  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  96.  The  reasons  why 
women  were  the  first  bearers  of  the  tidings  of  the  resurrection  are  alluded  to 
by  Augustine,  Serm.  xlv.  Vol.  v.  p.  266,  Serm.  ccxxxn.  ib.  p.  1108  (ed.  Migne). 

2  It  would  seem  probable  that  the  women  returned  with  the  account  of  having 
seen  the  Lord  not  long  after  Mary  Magdalene  had  left  the  Apostles.  We  have, 
however,  no  data  for  fixing  even  roughly  the  probable  time,  the  very  fact  of 
such  a  return  being  in  itself  in  some  degree  debatable.    See  below,  p.  351,  note 

3  It  may  indeed  be  urged  that,  if  the  disciples  had  received  thus  early  this 
double  testimony,  the  travellers  to  Emmaus  would  have  alluded  to  such  au 
appearance  (comp.  Luke  xxiv.  22);  but  to  this  it  may  be  replied,  that,  through- 
out, the  tidings  brought  by  the  women  seem  to  have  been  viewed  with  distrust; 
the  speakers  rather  appeal  to  what  the  apostles  had  seen  and  verified,  and  to 
them  the  Lord  had  certainly  not  yet  appeared. 


Lect.  Ylir.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  3.">1 

which  they  had  at  once  fallen  in  trembling  and  believing 
adoration.  They  saw,  they  believed,  they  touched,  and  they 
worshipped.1  More  we  know  not;  where  they  were,  or 
under  what  circumstances  they  thus  beheld  the  Lord,  must 
remain  only  a  matter  of  the  merest  conjecture.-  If  we 
adopt  the  received  text  we  may  seem  to  have  some 
grounds  for  thinking  that  this  appearance  was  vouchsafed 
to  the  women  soon  after  leaving  the  sepulchre;  but  as  the 
text  which  favors  such  an  opinion  has  been  justly  regarded 
extremely  doubtful,3  and  as  such  a  supposition  scarcely 
admits  of  any  reasonable  reconciliation  with  the  distinct 
statement  of  the  second  Evangelist  that  Mary 

i«r       -.    ,  r>  ,  ,  .  Xarkxvi.9. 

.Magdalene  was  the  nrst  mortal  to  whom  the 

risen  Lord  vouchsafed  to  show  Himself,  we  shall  perhaps 

1  The  conduct  of  the  women,  when  our  Lord  thus  vouchsafed  to  appear  to 
them,  is  noticeable  and  instructive.  It  is  specially  recorded  by  St.  .Matthew 
(ch.  xxviii.  9)  that  they  "held  Him  by  tin-  feet,"  and  "worshipped  Him"  (irpo- 
aeicvvriffav  avr6v).  They  at  once  recognize  Him,  with  holy  awe  (ver.  9),  not 
merely  as  their  Teacher  (contrast  .John  xx.  1G),  but  as  their  risen  Lord,  and 
instinctively  pay  Him  an  adoration  which,  as  Bengel  has  rightly  observed,  was 
but  rarely  evinced  towards  our  Lord  by  His  immediate  followers  previous  to  His 
passion:  "Jesuni  ante  passionem  alii  potius  alieniores  adorarunt  quam  disci- 
puli." —  In  Matt,  xxviii.  9.  The  exact  feeling  which  led  to  their  embracing  the 
Lord"s  feet  has  been  differently  estimated;  the  act  may  have  been  from  a  desire 
to  convince  themselves  that  it  was  He  (Chrysost.  in  /<«.■.),  or  from  joy  at  again 
beholding  Him  they  had  thought  lost  to  them  (De  Wette),  but  from  the  context 
(compare  ver.  10)  seems  more  naturally  to  have  been  from  a  reverential  love  (e/e 
ir6dov  koJ  Tt/UTJs,  Buthym.),  that  evinced  itself  in  supplicating  adoration.  Com- 
pare Up.  Hacket,  Sinn.  viii.  on  I!t  xurr.  p.  018  (Lond.  1675). 

-'  We  have  nothing  from  which  to  infer  where  or  when  our  Lord  appeared  to 
the  women.  If  we  adopt  what  seems  the  true  reading  in  ver.  9  (see  the  following 
note),  there  seems  nothing  unreasonable  in  the  conjecture  that,  after  the  delivery 
of  the  first  tidings  to  the  Apostles,  they  directed  their  steps  back  again  to  the 
sepulchre  (see  above,  p.  344,  note  2),  and  that  it  was  on  their  way  there  that  the 
Lord  vouchsafed  to  appear  to  them. 

8  If  we  adopt  the  received  text  in  Matt,  xxviii.  9,  is  St  inopcvovTO  a.Trayyu\ai 
TOts  p.abr)Tais  avrov,  we  have  no  alternative  but  to  suppose  that  the  appearance 
of  our  Lord  took  place  when  the  women  were  first  on  their  way  to  the  apostles. 
As,  however,  the  above  words  are  rejected  by  I.aclmiaim,  Tischeiidorf,  and  Tre- 
gelles,  on  w  hat  seem-  sufficient  evidence  (see  Ti-cheiid.  ill  tor.  Vol.  i.  p.  164),  and 
have  Strongly  the  appearance  of  an  explanatory  gloss,  we  are  in  no  way  neces- 
sitated by  the  context  to  refer  the  incident  to  the  first  journey.  No  valid  objec- 
tion to  this  can  be  urged  from  the  irop(vop.(vniv  5e  avTuf  of  ver.  11 ;  tin  apoel  le, 
having  related  all  connected  with  the  women,  reverts  to  the  terrified  guard 
(ver.  4),  and  to  the  further  circumstances  collected  with  them;  to  this  fresh  para- 
graph he  suitably  prefixes  a  note  of  time. 


352  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

be  right  in  conceiving  that  the  appearance  was  subse- 
quent to  the  first  communication  which  the  women  made 
to  the  Apostles,  and  most  undoubtedly  subsequent  to  the 
appearance  to  Mary  Magdalene.1  It  might  thus  seem 
designed  not  only  to  add  confirmation  to  the  statements 
which  had  been  made  by  Mary,  but  again  to  convey  a 
special  and  singular  command  relative  to  the  Lord's  ap- 
pearance in  Galilee2  which  had  first  been  alluded  to  by  the 
angels,  and  appears  to  have  been  directed, 

Luke  ocriv.  9.  .  . 

and  indeed  understood  to  have  been  directed, 
to  all  the  company  of  believers  then  abiding  in  Jeru- 
salem. 

But  the  apostles  were  to  receive  yet  a  third  and  more 

convincing  testimony  that  their  Lord  had 
o/!!urTonno1Z  risen,  and  had  been  seen,  yea,  and  spoken 
two  ascites  jou,-     with,  by  those  who  had  known   Him  in  the 

neying  to  £mmaus.  '       * 

flesh.  Meet  indeed  was  it  that  the  holy 
eleven  should  now  learn  to  believe.  Were  they  to  be  the 
last  to  welcome  back  their  risen  Saviour?  Were  their 
hearts  to  be  duller  even  than  that  of  the  Lord's  worst  and 
most  cruel  enemies  ?     Already  we  know  that  these  things 


1  Independently  of  the  very  distinct  statement  of  Mark  xvi.  9,  itpavr)  tr  p  w- 
t  ov  Mapia  rij  May8a\i)i>ri  (opp.  to  Robinson,  Bibl.  Sacra,  Vol.  ii.  p.  178),  it 
seems  impossible,  on  sound  principles  of  interpretation,  to  maintain,  with  Wiese- 
ler  (Citron.  Syn.  p.  426)  and  others,  that  the  appearance  recorded  in  John  xx.  14 
sq.  is  identical  with  that  to  the  other  women;  every  circumstance  is  not  only 
different,  but  contrasted.  See  Sticr,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  91  (Clark), 
and  comp.  Andrewes,  Semi.  iv.  Vol.  ii.  p.  233  (A.-C.  L.),  Ilacket,  Serm.  viii.  on 
Jtesurr.  p.  616  (Lond.  1675),  both  of  whom  rightly  consider  the  appearance  to 
Mary  distinct  from  that  to  the  women. 

2  The  repetition,  from  our  Lord's  own  lips,  of  the  direction  which  had  so 
recently  been  given  by  the  angels  (Matt,  xxviii.  7,  Mark  xvi.  7),  that  the  disci- 
ples were  to  depart  into  Galilee,  accompanied  with  the  reiterated  promise  that 
there  they  should  see  Him  (Matt,  xxviii.  10),  seems  clearly  to  invest  the  appear- 
ance specified  by  St.  Matthew  (ver.  16  sq.)  as  having  taken  place  in  that  country 
with  great  importance  and  significance.  The  very  distinct  and  consoling  ko.k(i 
fie  oi\iovto.i  (ver.  10),  when  coupled  with  the  remembrance  that  it  is  simply  cer- 
tain that  on  the  present  day  (John  xx.  19)  our  Lord  appeared  to  the  eleven  and 
those  with  them  in  Jerusalem,  seems  certainly  to  predispose  us  to  believe  that 
the  appearance  in  Galilee  was  to  the  Church  at  large,  and  thus  was  identical 
with  the  appearance  specified  1  Cor.  xv.  6.  See,  however,  the  further  remarks, 
p.  368,  note  1. 


Lect.  VIII.  TIIE  FORTY   DAYS.  353 

had   reached   the   ears   of  the  Sanhedrin,   and  that  the 
tidings  brought  by  the  terrified   soldiers  had 
oaused  them  deliberately  to  fabricate  a  lie  for 
these  bribed  watchers  to  repeat,1  lest  the  fact  of  the  super- 
natural   disappearance    of  the    body    should   be   publicly 
known,  and  the  multitude  should  believe  what  their  very 
lie  showed  they  themselves  were  in  a  great  measure  forced 
to  admit.     Were  Romans  to  testify,  and  Jews  to  accept, 
and  Christians  still  to  doubt  ?   Friends,  it  seemed,  required 
fuller  confirmation  than  enemies,  and  fuller  confirmation 
was  it  mercifully  appointed  that  they  were  yet  to  receive. 
Ere  the  day  closed  two  of  the  Lord's  followers,  but  neither, 
as  it  would    seem,  of  the    number  of  the    eleven,2  were 
to  be  the  bearers  of  the  third  testimony  to 
the  still  perplexed   and   doubting  Apostles.       Comi'- Mark  xiv- 
On  the  particulars  of  that  interesting  jour- 
ney to  Emmaus3  it  will  not  be  necessary  to   dwell,  as 


1  The  studious  way  in  which  this  lie  was  propagated  is  alluded  to  by  Justin 
Martyr  (  Trypho,  cap.  108,  compare  capp.  17,  117),  who  taxes  the  Jewish  rulers 
with  having  sent  out  "  chosen  men  over  the  whole  world  "  for  this  special  pur- 
pose. Compare  also  Tertullian,  mlr.  Mure.  in.  23.  The  missionary  efforts  of 
the  Jews  against  the  Christians  are  mentioned  by  Eusebius  [in  Jes.  xviii.  1)  in  a 
valuable  passage  cited  both  by  Thirlby  and  Otto  in  their  notes  on  Just.  51. 
Trypho,  cap.  17.  Compare  Tertull.  ad  Nat.  1.  14,  adv.  Judceos.  cap.  13.  Some 
good  comments  on  the  incident  of  the  bribery  of  the  guards,  and  on  the  fact  that 
it  is  especially  related  by  St.  Matthew,  will  be  found  in  Sherlock,  Trial  of  Wit- 
nesses,  Vol.  v.  p.  182,  and  in  Sequel  of  Trial,  ib.  p.  274. 

-  Who  the  two  disciples  were  has  been  much  debated.  The  popular  view  that 
Cleopas  was  identical  with Clopas or  Alphens (oomp.  p.  101,  note),  and  the  farther 
nut  unnatural  supposition  that  his  companion  was  James  his  son,  are  open  to 
this  etymological  objection,  that  KKeonas  appears  not  to  be  identical  with  KAo;- 
irtis,  but  to  be  a  shortened  form  of  KAeo7raTpos,  like  'Aj/Tnras  (Iter,  ii.  13)  and 
similar  forms.  See  Winer,  Gr.  §  10,  4.  1,  p.  93.  If  this  be  so,  the  slight  proba- 
bility that  the  BeCOnd  of  the  two  was  James  is  proportionately  weakened,  and 
the  appeal  to  1  Cor.  xv.  7  less  plausible.  We  are  thus  thrown  wholly  upon  con- 
jecture. This,  in  its  most  ancient  form,  appears  to  regard  the  unnamed  disciple 
as  Simon  (Origen,  Comment,  in  Joann.  I.  7.  Vol.  iv.  p.  8,  ed.  Bened.),  and  both 
as  of  the  number  of  the  Beventy  disciples;  "And  you  mni  t  know  that  these  two 
belonged  to  the  number  of  the  seventy,  and  that  Cleopas*S  companion  was 
Simon, —  not  Peter,  nor  he  of  Cana,  but  another  of  the  seventy."  — Cyril.  Alex 
<  '  m  8t.  Luke,  Part  ii.  p.  726  (Transl.). 

8  The  site  of  Emmans  ia  somewhat  doubtful.  In  ancient  times  it  appears  to 
have  been  identified  with  Nicopolis  on  the  border.of  the  plain  of  Phillatia,  but 
erroneously,  as  the  distance  Of  this  latter  place  from  Jerusalem  (about  twenty- 

30* 


354  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

all  is  so  clear  and  simple,  and  so  completely  free  from  those 

difficulties  of  adjustment  with  which   we  have    hitherto 

had  to  contend.    We  may,  however,  pause  to  remark,  that 

the  time  when  the  incident  took  place  is  generally  defined 

by  St.  Luke  as  having  formed  part  of  the 

same  day  on  which  our  Lord  rose  from  the 

rer.  29;  comp.     jrraVe.      As  we  know   that   it  was  not  vet 

tier.  33.  °  •> 

evening  when  the  two  disciples  turned  back- 
ward to  Jerusalem,  and  as  we  are  also  specially  informed 
by  the  Evangelist  of  the  distance1  of  Emmaus  from  the 
city,  we  may  perhaps  reasonably  suppose 
that  they  started  some  little  time  before  mid- 
day, and  so,  very  probably,  might  have  heard  of  the  later 
announcements  made  to  the  Apostles  by  Mary  Magda- 
lene and  the  other  ministering  women.     "  Him  they  saw 

not"  seems,  however,  to  be  the  pathetic  bur- 
ner. 24.  .  \ 

den  of  their  discourse  and  their  commun- 
ings,2 and  forms,  as  it  were,  the  sad  summary  of  that  want 

two  Roman  miles)  cannot  possibly  be  reconciled  with  the  distance  specified  by 
the  Evangelist.  See  next  note.  In  later  times  it  has  been  identified  with  the 
village  of  El-Kubeibeh,  about  two  and  a  half  hours  AT.  VV.  of  Jerusalem  (Van 
de  Velde,  Memoir  to  Map,  p.  309),  but  for  this  there  appears  no  reasonable 
grounds  of  any  kind.  Either,  then,  with  Porter  (Smith,  Diet.  s.  v.,  Vol.  i.  548), 
we  must  consider  the  site  yet  to  be  identified,  or  we  must  accept  the  tradition  of 
the  Greek  church,  which  places  it  at  Kuriet  el-'Enab  (Abu  Gush).  In  defence  of 
this  latter  opinion,  see  some  good  remarks  of  Williams,  Journal  of  Philology, 
Vol.  iv.  p.  262  sq. 

1  A  few  manuscripts  (H  Kl  N;  5  cursive  MSS.)and  a  few  versions  read  tita- 
tqv  i^i-jKuvTa  for  e|i';«o^Ta  in  Luke  xxiv.  13,  making  the  distance  of  Emmaus 
one  hundred  and  sixty  instead  of  sixty  stadia  from  Jerusalem.  This  reading 
has  been  supported  by  Robinson  (Palestine,  Vol.  iii.  p.  150,  ed.  2)  as  tending  to 
favor  his  identification  of  Emmaus  with  'Amwas  (the  ancient  Nicopolis),  but  is 
rightly  rejected  by  all  modern  editors.  The  statement  of  Josephus  (Bell.  Jud. 
vn.  6.  6)  that  there  was  a  place  of  this  name  sixty  stadia  (so  all  the  best  DISS.) 
from  Jerusalem,  and  the  other  arguments  urged  by  Reland  against  the  identifi- 
cation with  Nicopolis,  have  justly  been  considered  satisfactory  and  final.  See 
PalcBstina,  p.  42G  sq. 

2  It  is  doubtful  how  much  information  the  two  travellers  to  Emmaus  had 
received  in  reference  to  our  Lord's  resurrection.  It  might  possibly  be  concluded 
from  Luke  xxiv.  23,  24,  that  they  had  not  heard  of  the  tidings  brought  by 
Mary  Magdalene  and  the  women  relative  to  the  Lord's  appearances,  but  this, 
owing  to  the  time  at  which  they  appear  to  have  started,  is  not  likely.  They 
probably  speak  in  reference  to  the  confirmatory  reports  of  the  ticcs  tu'v  avv 
■jjij.'ii'  (ver.  24),  and  to  what  they  themselves  believed.    See  above,  p.  350,  note  2. 


LBOT.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  355 

of  faith  which  the  Lord  was  pleased  so  mercifully  and  so 
effectually  to  rebuke  by  the  deliberate  statement  and  ex- 
position1 of  all  the  passages  of  the  prophetic 
Scriptures  that  related  to  Himself,  and  had 
foretold  His  approaching  glorification. 

One  other  remark  we  may  make  on  the  apparently  sin- 
gular fact  that  the  two  disciples  were  not  able 

0  l  Inability  of  the 

to  recognize  our  Lord  till  the  very  moment  of    «/bci;.fcj  to  recog- 

_  liiii         nize  our  Lord. 

His  departure;    that    they  not    only  beheld 
Him,  and  heard  His  words,  but  felt  their  hearts  kindle  as 
they  listened  to  His  teaching,  and  yet  never 
surmised  even  who  it  was  that  spake  with 
them.     Singular  indeed  such  a  fact  does  seem  if  we  are  to 
reason  merely  from  what  we  know  or  think  we  may  know 
of  that  which  constitutes   personal    identity,2  but  in  no- 
wise singular  if  we  will  dismiss  our  philosophy  and  our 
speculations,  and  accept  only  what  is  told  us  by  one  and 
confirmed   by  another  Evangelist.      Plainly 
are  we  told  by  St.  Luke  that  the  eyes  of  the 
two  disciples  were  holden,  that  by  divine  interposition3 

1  There  is  some  little  difficulty  in  the  explanation  of  the  words  ical  ap^a/xevos 
airb  Mwiio-ecos  k,  r.  \.  Luke  xxiv.  27.  The  simplest  interpretation  is  either  to 
regard  the  ko.1  ap^aLia/os  as  belonging  to  both  parts  ("  beginning  with  Moses, 
ami  with  each  of  the  prophets  as  he  came  to  them,"  Meyer,  Alford),  or,  still 
mini'  simply,  to  consider  the  second  ano  as  a  continuation  ami  echo  of  tin-  Bret, 
which  necessarily  turns  the  substantive  it  precedes  into  the  genitive,  and  involves 
a  slight  laxity  in  the  mode  of  expression,  the  meaning  really  being,  "  lie  began 
with  Hoses,  and  went  through  all  the  prophets."     See  Winer,  Cram.  «  i',7.  2,  p. 

557  (ed.  6). 

2  Into  such  considerations  it  seems  here  wholly  undesirable  to  enter,  as  in 
ordinary  cases  they  involve  much  that  is  debatable,  and.  in  the  present,  much 
that  is  presumptuous.  All  that  we  arc  concerned  to  know  and  believe  may  be 
very  simply  stated.  On  the  one  hand,  we  have  before  us  in  this  portion  of  the 
Gospel  history  the  certain  fact  that  our  Lord's  body  was  the  same  body  as  that 
which  was  laid  in  the  tomb  (Luke  xxiv.  39,  John  xx.  20),  and,  on  the  other,  the 
Oertain  feet  that  Bis  form  sometimes  appeared  to  be  so  far  different  from  it 
(.Mark  x\i.  12)  as  not  to  be  recognized.  The  reconciliation  of  these  two  state- 
mentS  may  be  difficult,  owing  to  our  ignorance  of  the  exact  nature  of  the  Lord's 
resurrection  body,  but  the  facts  no  less  remain. 

3  The  meaning  of  the  words  01  d<pdaK/j.ol  abrwv  ZxpaTovvro  (Luke  xxiv.  16)  is 
■imply,  as  expressed  by  the  authorized  version,"  their  eyes  were  holden  "("  tene- 
bantur,"  Valg. :  "  detent!  erant,"  8yr.),  —  their  eyes  were  prevented  from  exert- 
ing their  full  power  of  recognition.     Compare  Kypke,  Obs.  SOCT.  Vol.  i.  p.  888. 


356  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

they  were  prevented  from  recognizing  their  Lord  till  He 
was  pleased  to  reveal  Himself.  Plainly,  too,  is  this  con- 
firmed by  St.  Mark,  who,  in  declaring  that  our  Lord 
appeared  to  these  disciples  in  a  "different 
form,"  intimates  with  all  clearness  that  our 
Lord  was  pleased  to  exercise  one  of  the  powers  which  had 
in  part  belonged  to  His  former  body,1  and  perhaps  wholly 
and  naturally  belonged  to  His  resurrection  body,  whereby 
the  characterizing  expression  of  His  most  holy  form  could 
be  weakened  or  withdrawn  until  the  power  of  recognition 
on  the  part  of  the  natural  beholder  Avas  completely  lost.2 
What  the  third  Evangelist  expresses  in  one  form  of  words, 
the  second  Evangelist  expresses  in  another,  both  however 
asserting  the  same  simple  truth,  that  the  Lord  was  pleased 
to  exercise  a  power,  whether  belonging  to  Him  in  respect 
of  His  divine  nature,  or  of  His  most  sinless,  pure,  and  now 
glorified3  humanity,  we  know  not,  nor  need  we  pause  to 


The  agency  by  which  this  was  effected  is  not  specified,  but  obviously  was 
divine.  The  seeming  discrepancy  between  this  passage  and  Mark  xvi.  12,  is  thus 
excellently  discussed  by  Augustine:  "Cum  legitur  '  tenebantur  oculi  eorum  ne 
agnoscerent  eum'  (Luc.  xxiv.  K),  impedimentum  quoddara  agnoscendi  videtur 
in  luminibus  factum  esse  cernentium;  cum  vero  aperte  dicitur,  '  Apparuit  eis  in 
alia  eftigie'  (Marc.  xvi.  12),  utique  in  ipso  corpore  cujus  alia  erat  effigies,  aliquid 
factum  fuisse,  quo  impedimento  tenercntur,  id  est  moram  agnoscendi  paterentur 
oculi  eorum.''  —  Epist.  cxlix.  31,  Vol.  ii.  p.  643  (ed.  Migne). 

1  Independently  of  any  special  exercise  of  our  Lord's  divine  power,  it  would 
seem,  from  the  fact  of  the  Transfiguration,  that  His  pure  and  perfect  humanity 
admitted  of  revelations  of  concealed  glory  which  involved  positive  changes  of 
appearance  (Luke  ix.  29),  and  yet  in  no  way  interfered  with  the  reality  of  His 
earthly  body.  See  Augustine,  Epist.  cxlix.  31,  Vol.  ii.  p.  643  (ed.  Migne).  and 
Muller,  Christian  Doctr.  of  Sin,  Vol.  ii.  p.  329  (Clark). 

2  A  few  comments  on  tins  subject  will  be  found  in  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord, 
Vol.  viii.  p.  101  sq.  (Clark).  Compare  also  Ebrard,  Kritik  der  Evang.  Gesch. 
§  in.  p.  588.  The  explanation  indirectly  suggested  by  Sherlock,  Trial  of  the 
Witnesses,  Vol.  v.  p.  195  (ed.  Hughes),  that  the  want  of  recognition  on  the  part 
of  the  two  disciples  was  owing  partly  to  the  persuasion  they  were  under  that 
their  Lord  was  dead,  and  partly  to  their  position, — walking  side  by  side,  —  is 
neither  in  itself  plausible,  nor  reconcilable  with  the  clear  statement  of  Mark 
xvi.  12. 

3  The  term  "  now  glorified  "  is  here  only  used  in  a  general  and  popular  sense, 
and  not  to  be  understood  as  denying  that  there  was  any  further  glorification  of 
the  body  after  the  resurrection.  Upon  such  subjects  it  is  not  either  very  safe  or 
very  desirable  to  speculate  too  freely;  it  may,  however,  be  added,  that  the  opin- 
ion of  some  of  the  sounder  expositors  of  recent  times  —  that  during  the  myste- 


Lect.  VIII. 


THE    FORTY    DAYS.  357 


inquire,  but  by  which,  whensoever  it  seemed  good  to  our 
Lord's  divine  wisdom,  the  holy  body  suddenly  ceased  to 
be  seen,  or  appeared  without  those  lineaments  that  were 
necessary  for  recognition. 

But  let  us  return  to  the  narrative.     It  was  late  evening 
before  the  two  disciples  returned  to  Jerusalem 

.  .  .  Appearance    to 

ami  appeared  before  the  Apostles,  who  now,     ,ht tt.„ .1, ,„,,/,,, 
with  other  members  of  the   infant  Church,1     i9.Co'"p" 
were  assembled  together,  and  on  whom  some       L"£eT/JufZ 
recent  appearance  of  our  Lord  to  St.  Peter 
had  made  apparently  so  great  an  impression,2  that  they  at 
once  greet  the  new  comers  with  the  joyful  tidings,  that 


rious  period  of  the  forty  clays  the  glorification  of  the  Lord's  holy  body  was  pro- 
gressive— is,  if  not  distinctly  confirmed  by  the  sacred  narrative  (consider, 
however,  avaffaifoi,  John  xx.  17),  still  by  no  means  inconsistent  with  it,  and 
deserves,  perhaps,  some  slight  consideration.  See  Sticr,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol. 
viii.  p.  S'J,  Mullcr,  Doctr.  if  Sin,  Vol.  ii.  p.  328  (Clark),  and  comp.  below,  p.  3C6, 
note  1. 

1  The  language  of  St.  Luke,  <vpoi>  ri^pota/xevovs  tovs  ei/Sexa  teal  tovs  avv 
aurois, oh. xxiv. 33, leads  us  to  conclude  that  others  beside  the  apostles  were  pres- 
enl  at  the  appearance  of  our  Lord  which  we  are  now  considering.  Whether,  how- 
ever, all,  or  whether  only  the  ten  Apostles  received  the  first-fruits  of  the  lloly 
Spirit  (John  xx.  22),  cannot  positively  be  decided,  as  St.  John  only  uses  the  gen- 
eral term  fJ.ainiTai.  Analogy  might  seem  to  suggest  that,  as  others  beside  the  Apos- 
tles (consider  Acts  ii.  1.4)  appear  to  have  received  the  miraculous  gift  of  the  Spirit 
on  the  day  of  l'entecost,  so  it  might  have  been  now;  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing,  however,  which  seems  to  have  been  specially  conveyed  in  this  gift  of 
the  Spirit  (see  Chrysost.  in  fee),  more  naturally  directs  our  thoughts  solely  to 
the  Apostles,  and  leads  us  to  think  that  they  were  on  this  occasion  the  only 
recipients;  the  airapxh  of  the  Spirit  is  received  by  the  a-n-apxv  of  the  Church. 
So  Andrewes,  who,  in  his  sermon  on  this  text,  defines  "  the  parties  to  whom"  as 
the  Apostles.  —Serin.  IX.  Vol.  hi.  p.  203  (A.-C.  L.). 

2  Of  the  appearance  of  our  Lord  to  St.  Peter,  incidentally  mentioned  by  St. 
Luke,  and  further  confirmed  by  1  Cor.  xv.  5,  we  know  notliing.  It  certainly 
occurred  after  the  return  from  the  sepulchre  (Luke  xxiv.  12,  John  xx.  10),  but 
whether  before  the  appearance  to  the  two  disciples  on  their  way  to  Emmaua 
(Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  11.  8.  3,  Tart  in.  p.  1091),  or  after  it,  as  conjectured  by  Cyril 
Alex.  (Comment,  on  St.  Luke,  Part  11.  p  728,  note),  cannot  be  determined.  The 
effect,  however,  produced  by  it  was  dearly  very  great.  The  words  of  the  disci- 
ples  now  show  plainly  their  conviction  of  the  truth  of  the  Lord's  resurrection 
(riyipdri  &  Kvptos  ovtws,  ver.  3t),  and  the  very  construction  adopted  by  the 
Evangelist  implies  how  eager  they  were  in  expressing  it:  tvpov  ri^poifffiffous 
tovs  fvotna  koX  robs  abv  o.vto7s  XtyovTas  k.  t.  A.  ver.  B4.  They  gave  hut  little 
credence  to  the  accounts  of  the  women,  bnt  in  the  report  of  one  of  their  own 
number,  and  that  one  St.  Peter,  they  very  nuturally  put  the  fullest  confidence. 
See  above,  p.  350,  note  2. 


358  THE   FORTY  DATS.  Lect.  VIII. 

"the  Lord  had  risen  indeed,  and  appeared  unto  Simon." 
And  now  they  too  in  their  turn  have  a  tes- 
timony to  render  to  the  assembled  disciples 
more  full  and  explicit  than  any  that  had  yet  been  delivered 
that  eventful  day.  They  have  seen  the  Lord,  they  have 
journeyed  with  Him,  they  have  conversed  with  Him,  they 
have  been  instructed  by  Him,  they  have  sat  down  with 
Him  to  an  evening  meal,1  they  have  received  bread  from 
His  sacred  hands,  and,  at  the  very  moment  when  recog- 
nition was  permitted,  they  have  seen  Him  vanish  from 
their  longing  eyes.  To  such  a  testimony  we  marvel  not  to 
find  it  recorded  that  full  belief  even  now  was  not  extended. 
Events  so  circumstantial  and  so  minutely  specified  seemed 
perhaps  less  to  confirm  than  to  bewilder.  They  might  at 
length  have  been  led  to  admit  the  already  thrice-repeated 
statement  that  the  Lord  had  been  seen,  that  His  sacred  form 
had  passed  before  the  eyes  of  Peter,  that  it  had  even  been 
seen  by  Mary  Magdalene,  and,  even  further,  that  it  had  been 
touched,  or  thought  to  have  been  touched,  by  the  other 
women  ;  —  this  they  might  at  length  have  been  disposed 
either  wholly  or  in  part  to  believe,  but  the 

Luke  xxiv.  37.  ,.  -,      ,  .  ■,  .  -, 

„    „„  present  narrative   seemed   to    involve    ideas 

T'er.38.  l 

of  a  bodily  form  and  substance  which  their 
subsequent   fears  and  our  Lord's  gentle  reproof  showed 


1  It  does  not  appear  from  the  inspired  narrative  that  our  Lord  actually  shared 
with  them  their  evening  meal.  The  words  Kal  iytvero  iv  t<£  /caTa/cA(&f)fat 
k.  r.  A.  (ver.  30)  seem  rather  to  imply  that  the  Lord  vouchsafed  to  sit  down  with 
the  two  disciples,  and  took  the  position,  gladly  offered,  of  master  of  the  house, 
but  that  after  He  had  pronounced  the  customary  blessing  [Mishna,  "  Bernchoth," 
vi.  6;  the  citation  in  Lightfoot,  reproduced  by  most  expositors,  "Tres  viri  qui 
simul  comedunt  tenentur  ad  gratias  indicendum  "  [cap.  vn.  1]  appears  to  refer  to 
grace  after  meat),  and  had  broken  the  bread  and  given  it  to  the  two  disciples, 
He  permitted  Himself  to  be  recognized,  and  then  vanished  from  their  eyes. 
The  act  by  which  the  Lord  was  pleased  to  awaken  their  powers  of  recognition 
was  "  the  breaking  of  the  bread"  (ev  ttj  K\deret  rov  &prov,  ver.  35;  on  this 
foree  of  eV,  see  notes  on  1  Thess.  iv.  18);  but  how,  whether  by  allowing  them  to 
see  the  wounds  on  His  sacred  hands,  or  (more  probably)  by  some  solemn  and 
well-remembered  gesture,  we  can  only  conjecture.  The  opinion  of  many  of  the 
early  writers,  that  this  was  a  celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  seems  inconsistent 
with  the  specification  of  time  (eV  t£  KaraicA.)  and  the  general  circumstances  of 
the  present  supper. 


Lect.VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  d59 

they  regarded  as  inconceivable  and  incredible.1  We  have 
no  need,  then,  to  explain  away  the  accurate  statement  of 
the  second  Evangelist  that  they  believed  not 

,  •       i        /•      i  r-  -n  CA.  xvi.  14. 

the  strange  recital  of  the  -wayfarers  to  Em- 
mans.1     But,  lo!    a   yet   fuller  testimony  was  now  to  be 
vouchsafed.     Even  while  they  were  considering  and  dis- 
cussing these  things,  and  now  perhaps  putting  questions  in 
every  form  to  the  two  latest  witnesses,  the  Lord  Himself 
appears  among  them,  and  with  words  of  holy  and  benedic- 
tory  greeting   shows  unto  them  both    His 
hands   and  His  side.     At   first,  as  we  learn 
from  St.  Luke's  narrative,  they  were  above  measure  per- 
turbed and  terrified  ;  they  well  knew  that  the  doors  were 
closed,  and  yet  they  plainly  beheld  their  Lord  standing 
before  them;3  they  knew  not  what  to  think  ;  they  conceive 

1  In  spite  of  the  joyful  avowal  of  their  belief  that  the  Lord  had  risen,  the 
disciples,  as  the  inspired  narrative  plainly  specifies,  are  greatly  terrified  (Luke 
xxiv.  37)  when  the  Lord  actually  appears.  This  was  not  in  itself  wholly  unnat- 
ural, but  seems  to  have  been  increased  by  the  belief  that  they  were  beholding  a 
spirit  {(S6kovu  wytvfiaAewpuv),  a  persuasion  against  which  our  Lord's  subse- 
quent words  are  specially  directed.  This  in  some  measure  prepares  us  for  the 
statement  in  Mark  xvi.  13.     See  the  following  note. 

-'  There  is  confessedly,  at  first  sight,  some  difficulty  in  reconciling  the  joyful 
greeting  of  the  Apostles  and  their  spontaneous  announcement  of  the  appear- 
ance to  Simon  (Luke  xxiv.  34)  with  the  incredulity  with  which  St.  Mark  (ch. 
xvi.  18)  tells  us  they  received  the  account  of  the  two  disciples  frbm  Emmaus.  It 
is  possible  that  the  ou5t  eKeivois  iiriffrevffav  (ver.  13)  may  refer,  not  to  the  Apos- 
tles, bat  to  some  of  the  others  (to?s  \otiro?s}  to  whom  they  related  it  (see  August. 
</.  Cbnsi  rig.  Evang.  in.  25),  but  it  seems  more  reasonable  to  suppose,  as  in  the 
text,  that  the  want  of  belief  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  strangely  circumstan- 
tial nature  of  the  narrative  of  the  two  disciples,  the  contrasts  it  presented  to 
two  of  the  other  appearances,  and  perhaps  also  to  the  third,  and  also  further, 
its  seeming  incompatibility  with  what  they  might  have  conceived  to  be  their 
Master's  present  state.  lie  whose  feet  suppliant  and  adoring  women  deemed 
they  clasped,  seemed  widely  different  from  the  humble  wrayfarer  to  Emmaus. 

8  The  special  notice  ru>v  Sbvpwv  KiK\a(rp.(vuiv  (John  xx.  19),  repeated  ver.  2C\ 
and  in  the  latter  case  without  any  repetition  of  the  reason,  seems  to  point  to  the 
mode  of  the  Lord's  entry  (&§poov  tart)  /ueVos,  ChrysOBt.)  as  involving  some- 
thing marvellous  and  supernatural.  How  this  took  place  we  are  wholly  unable 
to  explain,  but  the  conjecture  may  be  hazarded  that  it  was  not  so  much  spe- 
cially miraculous,  as  due  to  the  very  nature  and  properties  of  the  body  of  the 
risen  Lord.    Compare  p.  866 sq.    The  attempts  to  show  that  this  might  have 

been  merely  a  natural  entry  (Robinson,  Bibl.  SOCT.  Vol.  ii.  p.  182,  COmp.  Sher- 
lock, Triatqf  Willi.  Vol.  v.  p.  196)  do  not  seem  successful.  The  sittti  ei's  rb 
H((T0f  of  St.  John  appears  correlative  to  the  &(pavTos  frfivero  of  St  Luke  (ch. 
xxiv.  31);  if  the  hitter  be  supernatural,  so  certainly  would  seem  the  former. 


3G0  THE  FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.VIII. 

it  must  be  His  bodiless  spirit  that  they  are  now  beholding, 

and  the  flesh  quailed.     Though  partially  reassured  by  the 

sight  of  the  wounds,  and  by  the  condescend- 

john'xL-it.  mg  l°ve  which  permitted  them  to  touch  the 

Lubexxiy.89.        h0\y  body  that  stood  before  them,  they  even 

Luke  xxiv.  41.  •>  J  '  J 

then  could  not  fully  believe.  But  that  lack- 
ing belief  now  no  longer  arose  from  a  dull  or  faithless 
heart,  but  from  a  bewildering  joy  i1  it  was  to  be  excused, 
yea,  it  was   so  far  to  be  borne  with  that  a  special   sign, 

which  on  another  occasion  had  probably  been 

Mark  v.  43.  -i   •  ■       m  L      i      •  n        l  •    j.- 

used  in  a  similar  way  to  bring  final  conviction, 
was  yet  to  be  vouchsafed  to  the  overjoyed  but  amazed  be- 
holders.    The  fish  and  the  honey-comb  were 
taken  by  Him  who,  as  Augustine  has  well 
said,  had  "the  power  though  not  the  need  of  eating;"2 
they  were  taken  in  the  presence  of  all;  the 
Lord  was  pleased  to  eat  thereof;  and  then,  as 
we  may  infer  from  the  context,  the  Apostles  and  assembled 
followers  believed  with  all  the  fulness  of  a  fervent,  lasting, 
and  enduring  faith.     Then  at  length  the  first-fruits  of  the 
effusion  of  the  Holy  Spirit  were  conveyed  by 
an  outward  sign  and  medium,  and  the  myste- 
rious power  of  binding  and  loosing  was  conferred  upon  the 
inspired  and  anew  accredited  Apostles.3 


1  See  Luke  xxiv.  41,  ainVTovvTuv  avruiv  ctarb  tt)s  xctpay.  With  tin's  the 
tX.dpr)(rav  »(5()j/T6$  rhv  Kvpiop  of  St.  John  (ch.  xx.  20)  seems  exactly  to  harmo- 
nize. Joy  is  the  pervading  feeling,  so  great  and  so  overwhelming,  that  they  can 
hardly  believe  the  evidence  of  their  very  eyes  and  ears.  Both  Chrysostom  and 
Cyril  of  Alexandria  here  refer  to  John  xvi.  22  as  now  notably  fulfilled. 

-'  This  appears  to  have  been  a  favorite  comment  of  Augustine,  and  is  as  reason- 
able as  it  is  pertinently  expressed  :  "  Fecit  cum  discipulis  quadra ginta  dies,  intrans 
et  exiena,  manducans  et  bibens,  non  egestate  sert potestate ;  manducans  et  bibens, 
non  esuriendo  nee  sitiendo,  sed  docendo  et  monstranclo."  Serm.  ccxclviii.  2, 
Vol.  v.  p.  1360.  See  also  Serm.  cxvr.  3,  Vol.  v.  p.  659,  in  Joann.  Tractat.  lxiv. 
1,  Vol.  iii.  p.  1806,  an  interesting  passage  in  the  Civit.  Dei,  xin.  22,  Vol.  vii.  p. 
395,  and  some  sound  remarks  in  Cyril  Alex.  Commentary  on  St.  Luke,  Tart  II. 
p.  730  (Trans!.). 

3  The  mysterious  power  now  given  to  the  Apostles  was  an  essential  adjunct  to 
their  office  as  the  ambassadors  of  Christ,  and,  more  especially,  as  the  rulers  of 
His  Church;  "potestas  ista  ....  primitus  ApcMolis  lit  ecclesias  magistris  et  rec- 
toribus  demandata  est."    Barrow,  de  Potest.  Clav.  Vol.  via.  113.    It  had  refer- 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY  DAYS.  06 1 

But  one  there  yet  was  of  the  number  of  the  holy  eleven 
who  had  not  beheld  with  his  own  eyes,  and 

<■  it  j  it  a.    t      T  Dubelitf  of  Thom- 

who  could  not  and  would  not  believe  even     „.  our  Lor(fs ap. 

the  overwhelming  testimony  of  the  assembled    S^^S***" 

believers.     Seven  days  was  he  to  remain  in 

his  unbelief.     While   his  brother  Apostles  were  now  the 

probably   conscious    recipients  of  the  eternal  Spirit,1  the 

unconvinced    Thomas  was   yet  seeking   for  outward  and 

material   evidences,  without    which    he    had 

avowed  that  he  could  not  believe.     And  even 

these  were  vouchsafed  to  the  now  isolated  Apostle.     We 

read  in  the  inspired  narrative  of  the  fourth 

Evangelist,  how  on  the  day  which  the  Lord's 

renewed   appearance   thereon   had  now  begun   to  stamp 

with  a  special   sanctity,2  our   Lord   appears  in   the  same 


ence,  as  Meyer  rightly  observes,  not  merely  to  the  general  power  of  receiving 
into  the  Church  or  the  contrary,  but  to  their  disciplinary  power  over  individual 
members  of  it,  both  in  respect  of  the  retaining  and  the  absolving  of  sins.  On 
the  subject  generally,  see  Andrewes,  Serm.  Vol.  v.  p.  82  (  A.-C.  Libr.)  Barrow, 
de  Potest.  Ctav.  Vol.  viii.  p.  84  sq.  (Oxf.  1830),  Bingham,  Works,  Vol.  viii.  p.  357 
6q.  (Lond.  1844),  and  comp.  Marshall,  Penit.  Disc.  I.  2,  p.  10  sq.  (A.-C.  L.),  Thorn- 
dike,  Princ.  of  Chr.  Truth,  I.  9,  Vol.  ii.  p.  157  (A.-C.  L.). 

1  It  seems  right  and  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  Apostles  now  felt  them- 
selves endued  with  that  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  which  they  had  received  from 
their  Lord,  though  as  yet  they  could  have  had  no  power  of  exercising  it.  That 
this  was  a  real  airapxh  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  rightly  maintained  by  all  the  best 
expositors;  the  gift  was  not  general  like  that  at  the  Pentecost,  but  special  and 
peculiar  {iTrr\yay(vT  Civ  hv  apyre  k.  t.  \.  fictKvvs  irolov  (ISos  cvepyfias  $i5ui(riv, 
Chrvsost.),  yet  no  less  veritably  a  gift  of  the  Spirit.  Luthardt  (Johmin.  Erang. 
Part  ii.  p.  449)  presses  the  absence  of  the  article,  and  urges  that  it  was  only  a 
spirit  of  the  new  life  as  coming  from  the  risen  but  not  ascended  Lord  :  for  such 
a  distinction,  however,  there  is  no  sound  grammatical  foundation  (see  notes  on 
Gal.  v.  5),  and  apparently  no  evidence  deducible  from  the  language  of  the  X.  T. 

2  It  does  not  seem  wholly  improbable  that  we  have  here  the  very  commence- 
ment, as  it  were,  of  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  day,  and  the  earliest  indication 
of  that  observance  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  which  the  Lord's  resurrection 
had  naturally  evoked,  and  to  which  His  present  appearance  gave  additional 
sanction  and  validity.  See  Cyril  Alex.  inJoann.  xx.  20,  Vol.  iv.  p.  1104.  and 
compare  Hula.  Essay  for  1S43.  p.  74.  The  fair  statement  of  the  whole  contested 
subject  would  seem  to  be  as  follows,  — that  the  dedication  of  one  day  of  the  week 
to  the  special  service  of  God  is  binding  on  us  by  His  primeval  law,  but  that  the 
special  selection  of  the  .first  day  rests  on  Apostolical,  and,  as  the  present  case 
Be  ma  in  suggest,  indirectly  Divine  appointment.  Compare  also  Abp.  Bramhall, 
Lords  Day,  Vol.  v.  p.  32  sq.  (A.-C.  L.). 

31 


362  THE  FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

supernatural  manner;1  we  mark  with  adoring  wonder  how 

the  personal  test  which  the  doubting  Apostle  had  required 

was  now  vouchsafed  to  him,  and  it  is  with 

thankful  joy  that  we  hear  that  outburst  of 

inspired  conviction  that  now  recognized  in  the  risen  Jesus, 

yea,  in   Him  whose  very  wounds  the  privileged  Apostle 

was  permitted  to  touch,  not  so  much  the  humanity  as  the 

divinity;2 — "and  Thomas  answered  and  said 

unto  Him,  My  Lord,  and  my  God." 

Some  time  afterwards,  how  long  we  know  not,  followed 

the  Lord's  manifestation  of  Himself  by  the 

our  Lord's  ap-    iake  0f  Tiberias,  of  which  we  have  so  full 

pearanceby  the  lake  ' 

of  nberias.  and  explicit  account  from  the  hand  of  the 

ch.xxi.\sq.       beloved  Apostle.     The  promise  of  the  great 
jfaM.asm-.32.      Shepherd  that  He  would  2fo  before  His  flock 

Mark  xiv.  28.  r  ° 

into  Galilee,  and  would  there  appear   unto 
them,  was  now  first  most  solemnly  fulfilled.      Seven  Apos- 
tles3 are  the  first  witnesses,  and  under  circum- 
rohnxxi.  24.        stances  which  the  distinct  and  emphatic  lan- 
guage of  the  inspired  narrator  leads  us  to  believe  produced 

1  That  our  Lord's  appearance  was  supernatural  again  rests  on  the  special 
notice  of  the  fact  of  the  closed  doors.  See  above,  p.  359,  note  3.  The  peculiar 
terms  (here  epx^rui  kuI  tart),  ver.  26,  comp.  ver.  19)  which  seem  designedly  used 
by  the  Evangelists  in  describing  our  Lord's  appearances  are  noticed  by  Stier, 
Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  90  (Clark). 

2  The  declaration  of  St.  Thomas  has  often  and  with  justice  been  urged  by 
writers  upon  our  Lord's  divinity,  but  the  exact  circumstances  under  which  it 
was  made,  and  which  add  so  much  to  its  force,  have  not  always  been  sufficiently 
considered.  Let  it  then  be  observed  that  it  is  at  the  very  time  when  our  Lord  is 
being  graciously  pleased  to  convince  His  doubting  follower  of  the  reality  of  Ilis 
sacred  body,  in  fact  of  His  perfect  humanity,  that  the  Apostle  so  preeminently 
recognizes  his  Lord's  divinity.  With  his  hands  on  the  sacred  wounds,  with  evi- 
dence the  most  distinct  that  He  whom  he  was  permitted  to  touch  was  man,  the 
convinced  disciple,  in  terms  the  most  explicit,  declares  Him  to  be  God.  Some 
sound  comments  on  this  text  will  be  found  in  Cyril  Alex,  in  Joann.  xx.  28,  Vol. 
iv.  p.  1108  (ed.  Aubert.),  and  for  a  collection  of  analogous  passages,  Waterland, 
Serm.  vi.  on  our  Lord's  Divinity  (Moyei-'s  Led.)  Vol.  ii.  p.  129. 

3  It  is  not  perfectly  certain  that  the  two  not  mentioned  by  name  (&K\oi  e'/c 
twi>  na&rjTcou  avrov  5vo,  ver.  2)  were  Apostles,  as  the  word  fJ.a^7]Ta\  has  some- 
times in  St.  John  a  more  inclusive  sense.  As,  however,  in  verse  1  it  seems  used 
to  specify  the  Apostles  (with  verse  1  compare  John  xx.  26,  to  which  the  irahiv 
naturally  refers  the  reader),  the  assumption  that  it  is  used  in  a  similar  sense  in 
ver.  2  appears  perfectly  reasonable.    See  Ldcke,  in  loc.  Vol.  ii.  p.  806  (ed.  3). 


Lect.  VIII.  THE    FOHTY    DAYS.  3G3 

an  impressiou  almost  more  deep  and  enduring  than  any  they 
had  yet  received.1     Upon    the    details,  where  all   is    told 
"with  such  divine  simplicity,  and  where  there  are  no  diffi- 
culties either  in  the  language  or  in  the  sequence  of  the 
narrative,  it  will  not  perhaps  be  necessary  to  dwell.     We 
may  pause,  however,  to  notice  that  again  the  disciples  did 
not   recognize   the  Lord,  though   they  were 
near  enough  to  the  beach  to  hear  his  voice.2 
On  this  occasion,  however,  there  seems  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Lord's  form  was  specially  changed,  or  that  it 
was  not  His  divine  pleasure  that  He  should  at  first  be  rec- 
ognized.    It  was  now,  it  must  be  remembered,  early  dawn ; 
the  wearied   men   probably  saw   the    figure 
somewhat  indistinctly,  and  with  the  unobserv- 
ing  eye  of  those  who  expect  nothing  and  indeed  perceive 
nothing  different  to  the  usual   homely  incidents  of  their 
daily  life,3  they  answer   the  friendly  call  of  the  stranger ; 


1  It  is  not  wholly  improbable  that  the  emphatic  declaration  of  the  Apostle  at 
the  close  of  the  narrative,  in  reference  to  the  truth  of  his  testimony  (John  xxi. 
24),  may  have  been  occasioned  by  the  feeling  that  this  manifestation  of  our  Lord 
vt  as  perhaps  the  most  important  that  had  yet  been  vouchsafed.  It  was  indeed  a 
manifestation  (itpavtpwaev  in  tovtou  St\\ov,  oti  ovx  iwpuTo  el  jut)  crvyKaTf^ri, 
Chrys.)  alike  convincing  and  consolatory.  On  the  one  hand,  in  the  various  acts 
He  was  pleased  to  perform  (ver.  13),  it  most  clearly  set  forth  the  reality  of  the 
Lord's  risen  body ;  and,  on  the  other,  it  assured  the  Apostles  of  the  continuance 
ot  those  same  miraculous  powers  which  would  have  ever  occupied  so  prominent 
a  place  in  their  retrospect  of  their  Master's  earthly  ministry.  On  the  importance 
of  this  revelation,  see  Augustine,  in  Joann.  Tractat.  cxxir.,  where  it  is  suggested 
that  the  concluding  verses  of  the  preceding  chapter  might  have  been  added, — 
"secutura  narratloilis  quasi  prorcinium,quod  ei  quodammodo  faceret  eminentio- 
rcm  locum."  —  Vol.  iii.  p.  lUy'J  (ed.  Bligne). 

2  The  distance  at  which  the  boat  was  from  the  shore  (about  one  hundred 
yards,  ver.  8)  would  certainly  be  sufficient  to  prevent  them  immediately  recog- 
nizing one  whom,  at  that  particular  place  and  time,  they  were  in  no  way 
expecting  to  see,  unless,  indeed,  we  are  to  suppose  that  there  was  something  in 
the  Lord's  form  and  general  appearance  strikingly  different  from  that  of  other 
men.  This,  however,  we  have  already  seen,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  the 
case.    Comj).  Lect.  m.  p.  92,  note  1. 

3  It  seems  natural  to  think  that  the  friendly  voice,  "calling,  after  the  manner 
of  the  East,  children"  (Stanley,  Palest,  p.  374),  and  inquiring  if  they  had  any 
irpoacpayiov,  was  conceived  by  the  disciples  to  be  that  of  one  who  wished  to  buy 
of  them,  —  an  fXfWccv  Ti  wvt?<r$ai  trap'  a'jruv,  ChrySOBt.  in  lOC.  Comp.  Cj  iii 
Alex,  in  Joann.  Vol.  iv.  p.  1113.  To  this  Dean  Trench  objects,  supposing  it  to  be 
merely  the  inquiry  of  that  natural  interest,  "not  unmixed  with  curiosity," 


364  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

and  supposing  Him  to  be  one  who  would  fain  buy  of  them, 

they  tell   Him   in  the  simplest  way  they  have   nothing. 

Even  when  told  to  cast  in  their  net  in  a  par- 

Ver  5  • 

rJ&  ticular  place,  they  still  appear  to  have  been 

in  no  way  surprised  by  the  order.     It  might 

be   the  suggestion  of  one  experienced,  or  who  had   some 

reasons  for  his  suggestion  that  they  did  not  know,  and  did 

not  pause  to  consider.    They  obey,  perhaps,  with  the  feeling 

of  men  who  in  their  ill  success  were  ready  to 

take  any  suggestion,  by  whomsoever  offered. 

The  wonderful  and  miraculous  draught,1  however,  at  once 

arouses  their  attention.     The  sudden  contrast  with  their 

weary  and  profitless  night's  fishing,  the  great  number  of 

large  fish,  and  the  care  requisite  to  bring  them 

to  the  land,  all  bring  back  to  their  minds  the 

never-forgotten  miracle  of  the  early  part  of  the  past  year, 

when  three  at  least  of  those  now  on  the  lake  had  received 

the  divine  call  to  become  fishers  of  men,  and  had  forsook, 

as  they  then   perhaps   thought,  forever   that 

*•  calling  to  which   they   had   now   returned. 

Luke  v.  11.  °  J 

Everything  brings  back  the  past ;  and  he  on 
whom  the  past  had  perhaps  made  the  most  permanent 
impression  2  is  the  first  to  recognize  the  blessedness  of  the 

which  all  feel  in  the  uncertainty  of  the  fisherman's  toil  (Notes  on  Miracles,  p. 
456).  It  should  be  remembered,  however,  that  we  are  only  considering  how  the 
Apostles  understood  the  speech,  and  this,  probably,  is  all  that  Chrysostom  meant 
to  imply. 

1  On  this  miracle,  the  peculiarities  of  which  are  the  similarity  it  preserves  to 
the  former  miracle  on  the  lake,  and  the  apparently  symbolical  character  of  some 
of  its  incidents,  see  the  interesting,  but  perhaps  too  minutely  allegorizing  com- 
ments of  Augustine,  in  Joann.  Tractat.  cxxn.  Vol.  iii.  p.  1962  sq.,  Stier,  Disc,  of 
our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  212  sq.,  Trench,  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  p.  453  sq. 

2  We  may  justify  this  casual  remark  not  only  by  what  followed,  but  by  a 
reference  to  the  fact  that,  though  St.  John  had  probably  received  his  call  a  year 
previously  to  the  former  miracle  (John  i.  37  sq.),  and  had  accompanied  our  Lord 
as  one  of  His  special  followers,  the  miraculous  draught  of  fishes  constituted  the 
epoch  when  he  deliberately  and  formally  left  his  father,  his  home,  and  all  the 
employments  of  his  former  life  (compare  Matt.  iv.  20,  Mark  i.  20,  Luke  v.  11)  to 
become  a  fisher  of  men.  St.  Peter,  we  know,  was  much  moved  at  the  time  by 
the  miracle  and  its  results  (Luke  v.  9),  but  the  impression  produced  on  the  mind 
of  the  younger  Apostle,  from  the  circumstances  with  which  the  miracle  stood  in 
connection,  would  probably  have  been  more  lasting. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  8(35 

present.  The  Apostle  whom  the  Lord  loved  is  the  first  to 
recognize ;  and  yet,  as  we  might  have  expected,  another  is 
the  first  to  greet.1  He  who  on  that  very  lake,  and  under 
circumstances  strikingly  similar,  had  besought  his  holy 
Master  to  depart  from  one  so  sin-stained,  now 
casts  himself  into  the  water,  and  is  the  first 

•  John  xxx.  J. 

to  kneel  at  the  divine  feet. 

One  other  point  only  requires  a  passing  comment  — the 
reverential  awe  felt  by  the  disciples,  and  its 
connection    with  the   circumstances   of  the       Reverential  awe 

of  the  Apostles. 

morning    meal.      These    circumstances,   we 

know,  were  strange  and  perplexing.      The  fire  of  coals 

provided  by  the  ministry  of  unseen  agencies,2 

the  fish  lyin£  thereon,  the  bread  —  whence       _    „ 

J       O  '  Fer.9. 

came  they  ?     Enough  there  was  in  this  mys- 
terious provision  which  the  Lord  had  just  been  pleased  to 
make  for  the  wants  of  His  wearied  disciples  to  account 
for  the  awed  silence  which,  we  are  told,  they 
preserved  with  regard  to  the  exact  state  of 
His  holy  personality.3     Enough  there  was  in   this  alone, 
without  our  being  obliged  to  suppose  that  there  was  any 


1  The  differences  of  nature  and  character,  in  the  case  of  the  two  Apostles, 
•which  the  incident  discloses  are  thus  clearly  stated  by  Chrysostom,  in  loc: 
"When  they  recognized  the  Lord,"  says  this  able  commentator,  "again  do  the 
disciples  display  the  peculiarities  of  their  individual  characters.  The  one,  for 
instance,  was  more  ardent,  but  the  other  more  elevated  ;  the  one  more  eager,  but 
the  other  endued  with  tiner  perception.  On  which  account  John  was  the  first  to 
recognize  the  Lord,  but  Peter  to  come  to  Him."  —  In  Joann.  Horn,  lxxxvii. 
Vol.  viii.  p.  594  (ed.  Bened.  2). 

2  It  is  idle  to  speculate  on  the  agencies  which  caused  the  tire  of  coals  and  the 
flan  thereon  to  be  found  on  the  beach.  The  most  reasonable  and  reverent  sup- 
position is  that  it  was  miraculous  (Chrysost.,  Theoph.,  al.);  but  as  nothing  is 
added  from  which  any  inference  can  be  drawn,  we  must  be  content  to  leave  the 
statement  as  we  find  it.  The  attempt  of  Lange  [Leben  Jesu,  n.  8.  G,  Tart  in.  p. 
1713)  to  account  for  it  in  a  natural  way  is  certainly  not  satisfactory. 

3  Observe  especially  the  comment  of  the  Apostle,  ovdels  eT'JAyua  rwv  fia^r]Ta>i' 
i^Tacrai  o.vt6v,  2u  rls  el,  John  xxi.  12.  Here,  again,  the  explanation  of 
Chrysostom  seems  perfectly  satisfactory :  "Seeing  his  form  somewhat  different 
to  what  il  was  before,  and  with  much  about  it  that  caused  astonishment,  they 
were  above  measure  amazed,  and  felt  a  desire  to  make  some  inquiry  about  it; 
but  their  apprehension,  and  their  knowledge  that  it  was  not  another,  but  Him- 
self, restrained  the  inquiry."  —  In  Joann.  Vol.  viii.  p.  594  sq. 

3J* 


366  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

special  alteration  in  the  Lord's  appearance.  A  change 
doubtless  there  was,  as  the  early  interpreters  have  rightly 
surmised,1  but  it  was  a  change  probably  rather  felt  than 
seen  ;  a  change  that  might  have  deepened  their  reverential 
awe,  but  in  no  way  interfered  with  the  warm  feelings  of 
holy  love  which  two  at  least  appear  to  have  specially 
evinced  both  in  their  words  and  their  ac- 

Comp.  ver.  19,20.         . 

tions.  Ihe  very  last  glimpse  we  are  per- 
mitted to  behold  of  this  third  blessed  interview  with  the 
disciples,  so  rich  in  symbol  and  so  deep  in  meaning  —  this 
continuance,  as  it  were,  after  the  weary  night  had  passed 
away,  of  the  Last  Supper,2  is  an  incident  that  brings  back 
the  past,  and  mingles  it,  as  it  were,  with  the  blessed  and 
glorious  present.  Again  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  appear 
before  us  in  their  wonted  relations  of  warmest  and  most 
clinging  love  to  their  holy  Master.  We  see  the  Lord 
gradually  and  perhaps  mysteriously  withdrawing;3  we  see 

1  See  the  above  note.  The  exact  words  of  Chrysostom  are  rfv  fiop<pr]v  aWoto- 
repau  opuvres,  by  which  we  may  conclude  he  intended  to  imply  a  partial 
change,  something  easy  to  recognize,  but  not  easy  to  specify.  Comp.  Luthardt, 
Johann.  Evang.  Part  II.  p.  468.  If  we  admit  the  suggestion  that  has  already 
been  thrown  out  (p.  356,  note  3),  we  may  perhaps  allow  ourselves  to  imagine  that 
the  developing  glorification  of  the  Lord  was  now  beginning  to  make  a  more  dis- 
tinct impression  on  the  beholders. 

2  Compare  Stier,  Disc,  of  our  Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  226,  where,  as  in- all  sounder 
and  deeper  expositions  of  this  portion  of  Scripture,  the  mystical  and  typical 
character  of  the  early  morning  meal,  as  well  as  of  the  preceding  miracle,  is 
properly  recognized.  The  details  of  many  of  these  interpretations,  and  the 
desirableness  of  the  attempts  to  allegorize  every  particular,  e.  g.,  the  number  of 
fish  (Jerome,  Cyril  Alex.,  Theoph.,  al.),  may  most  fairly  be  called  in  question; 
but  the  general  reference  of  the  miracle  to  the  future  labors  of  the  Apostles,  its 
analogy  to  the  previous  miracle,  and,  perhaps,  the  retrospective  reference  of 
this  morning  meal  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  can  hardly  be  denied  by  any  thoughtful 
expositor.  See  Luthardt,  Johann.  Evang.  Tart  n.  p.  466  sq.,  Trench,  Notes  on 
the  Miracles,  p.  459  sq.,  and  a  good  note  of  Alford,  in  loc.  Vol.  i.  p.  861  (ed.  4). 

3  It  seems  probable  that,  as  our  Lord  uttered  the  words  "Follow  me"  (ver. 
19),  He  commenced  withdrawing  from  the  Apostles.  Peter,  not  fully  under- 
standing the  meaning  of  the  command,  obeys  in  a  literal  sense.  While  advanc- 
ing, he  turns  and  looks  round,  and  sees  the  beloved  Apostle  following  also, 
upon  which  he  puts  the  inquiry,  olros  5e  ti  ( i.  e.,  probably  etrrai),  "  what  shall 
his  lot  be?  "  (ver.  21).  It  may  be  observed  that  the  true  meaning  of  a.Ko\oo£>£i 
Hot,  when  viewed  in  connection  with  what  precedes,  would  seem  to  be  "  follow 
me,  even  unto  that  martyr's  death  for  my  name  which  I  have  but  just  now 
foretold."  Compare  Augustine,  in  Joann.  Tractat.  cxxiv.  1,  Vol.  hi.  p.  1370 
(ed.  MignS). 


Lect.TIIi.  THE   FORTY    DAYS.  oG7 

the  elder  Apostle  perhaps  obeying  literally  the  figurative 
command  of  his  Lord,  and  behind  him  the 

'  .  Per.  19. 

true-hearted  son  of  Zebedee,  both  following 

the  steps  of  their  receding  Saviour;  we  hear  the  solemn 

and  mysterious  words  in  answer  to  the  un- 

"'  John  xxi.  22. 

befitting  question,1  and  the  holy,  exalted,  and 
most  impressive  scene  fades  away  from  our  wondering  eyes. 
But  this  interview,  full  as  it  was  of  blessedness  and  con- 
solation, was  not  to  be  the  last.     The  Lord 

h,  .        ,  ,  •  c   TT*  Appearance     of 

ad  promised,  even  on  the  morning  or  His     the  lord  to  the 

resurrection,  that  lie  would  meet  His  Church  •    "'  ...  ,„ 

Matt,  xxi'iu.  10. 

in  that  land  in  which  it  had  formerly  been 
established  and  consolidated.  And  there,  as  it  would 
seem,  all  now  were  assembled,2  hourly  expecting  the  com- 
plete fulfilment  of  a  promise,  of  which  the  last-mentioned 
interview  had  been  a  commencement  and  first-fruits.  Nor 
did  they  tarry  long.  Probably  within  a  few  days  after 
the  appearance  by  the  lake,  and  on  a  moun- 

i  .  Ver.  16. 

tain  which  He  had  appointed,  perchance  that 

of  the  Beatitudes,3  the  Lord  manifests  Himself  not  only  to 


1  The  exact  meaning  of  the  words  used  in  reference  to  St.  John  has  been 
much  discussed.  The  most  simple  and  satisfactory  explanation  would  seem  to 
be  that  alluded  to  by  Theophylact,  according  to  which  the  coming  of  the  Lord 
is  to  be  understood  of  that  form  of  His  advent  which  in  His  last  prophecy  He 
was  pleased  to  connect  with  His  final  advent,  viz.,  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.  Com- 
pare Matt.  xiv.  28.  The  hypothetical  mode  of  explanation  (Cyril  Alex.,  al.),  and 
that  which  refers  ixivuv  to  a  natural  death,  seem  much  less  satisfactory. 

2  It  seems  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  great  promise  uttered  by  the  angels 
after  the  resurrection  (Matt,  xxviii.  7,  Mark  xvi.  7),  and  specially  confirmed  by 
our  Lord  (John  xx.  10),  was  understood  to  apply  to  the  whole  Church,  and  had 
induced  the  greater  part  of  the  brethren  who  were  then  in  Jerusalem  to  take 
their  way  to  Galilee  and  there  await  its  fulfilment.  Some  of  the  Apostles,  we 
have  seen,  had  not  ouly  returned  to  Galilee  but  even  resumed  their  former  call- 
ing (John  xxi.  2). 

3  The  exact  scene  of  the  solemn  meeting  is  not  further  specified  than  as  being 
"the  mountain  which  Jesus  appointed, "  and  in  Galilee  (Matt,  xxviii.  1G).  The 
only  two  conjectures  worthy  of  consideration  arc  (a)  that  it  was  Tabor,  which 
from  its  situation  might  seem  not  unsuitable  for  a  place  «f  general  meeting  (.-re 
Lange,  Leben  Jesu,  n.  8.  7.  Part  in.  p.  1730),  and  (//)  that  it  was  the  mountain  on 
which  the  .Sermon  had  been  delivered,  which,  from  its  proximity  to  the  lake  of 
Tiberias  (see  p.  1G9,  note  2)  and  to  the  populous  plain  of  Gennesareth,  might 
Mini,  topographically  considered,  even  more  suitable  than  Tabor,  and  from  its 
connection  with  the  founding  of  the  Church  much  more  probable,  considered 


368  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

the  eleven,  but,  as  the  terms  of  his  promise  seem  fairly 

to  imply,  to  the  five  hundred  brethren1  al- 

i  cor.  xv. 6.  luded  to  by  St.  Paul.     The  interview  was  of 

the  deepest  solemnity,  and  tends  to  set  forth 

the  majesty  of  the  risen  Lord  in  a  manner  far  more  distinct 
than  had  even  yet  been  witnessed.     While  a 

Matt,  xxviii.  17.  " 

few  doubt  the  evidence  of  their  senses,2  and 

cannot  apparently  believe  that  they  are  beholding  their 

Lord,  the  chosen  eleven  no  sooner  see  than 

Matt,  xxviii.  17. 

they  adore.  That  adoration  the  Lord  now 
not  only  accepts,  but  confirms  by  the  mighty  declaration 
that  "all  power  now  was  given  to  Him  in  heaven  and  in 
earth."  Yea,  He  gives  it  a  yet  deeper  meaning  and  fuller 
significance  by  now  issuing  His  great  evangelical  com- 
mission, and  by  enhancing  it  with  that  promise  of  bound- 
less consolation — that  with  those  that  execute  that  com- 
mission He  will  be  present  unto  the  end,  even  unto  the 

theologically.  The  supposition  of  Hofmann  {LebenJesu,  §  89,  p.  397)  that  the 
term  "  Galilee"  here  used  by  St.  Matthew  really  refers,  not  to  the  country  but  to 
the  northern  summit  of  Olivet,  which  appears  to  have  been  so  named  (though 
not  by  any  early  writers),  is  by  no  means  natural  or  probable. 

1  Nearly  all  the  best  recent  expositors  concur  in  supposing,  that  the  appear- 
ance of  our  Lord  mentioned  by  St.  Matthew  (ch.  xxviii.  16)  is  identical  with  that 
alluded  to  by  St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xv.  6)  as  having  been  vouchsafed  to  above  five  hun- 
dred brethren  at  once.  Comp.  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops.  p.  434,  Robinson,  Bill. 
Sacra,  Vol.  ii.  p.  185.  It  is  true  that  St.  Matthew  only  specifies  the  eleven  as 
having  gone  to  the  appointed  mountain,  but  the  solemn  character  of  the  twice- 
repeated  promise  (see  p.  352,  note  2)  on  the  morning  of  the  resurrection,  com- 
bined with  the  fact  that  our  Lord  had  appeared  twice  previously  to  the  collected 
Apostles,  renders  it  highly  probable  that  the  term  was  here  not  intended  to  be 
understood  as  exclusive. 

2  The  statement  that  "some  doubted,"  though  strongly  urged  by  Meyer  and 
others  (comp.  Winer,  Gr.  §  17.2,  p.  96)  as  referring  to  the  Apostles,  is  far  more 
reasonably  referred  to  others  who  were  with  them.  Though  it  cannot  perhaps 
positively  be  asserted  that  St.  Matthew  must  have  used  oi  ij.ev  —  ol  5e  if  he  had 
meant  to  indicate  that  some  few  of  the  Apostles  doubted,  yet  it  seems  natural  to 
suppose  that  some  very  explicit  form  of  expression  (e.  g.,  rivts  «'{  avTuv)  would 
certainly  have  been  selected  to  mark  a  fact  in  itself  so  unlikely  (even  if  we  con- 
fine ourselves  to  St.  Matthew's  Gospel)  as  the  doubting  of  some  of  the  eleven 
while  the  rest  were  sufficiently  persuaded  to  worship.  If  we  admit  that  the 
events  specified  by  St.  John,  ch.  xx.  19 — 29,  preceded,  then  the  supposition  that 
the  doubters  were  Apostles  seems  plainly  preposterous.  See  Stier,  Disc,  of  our 
Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p  280  (Clark).  The  assumption  of  Miiller  and  others  that  the 
doubting  only  lasted  till  the  Lord  came  nearer  (TrpoatK&wi',  ver.  18)  is  precarious, 
as  no  hint  of  this  is  contained  in  the  words. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  369 

hour  -when  His  mediatorial  kingdom  shall  be  merged  in 
the  eternity  of  His  everlasting  reign.1 

One  farther  and  last  interview  is  yet  to  be  vouchsafed, 
and  of  that  a  holier  mountain  even  than  .that 
of  the  Beatitudes  is  to  be  the  scene  and  the     ce^tmLor<rs  A,~ 
witness.     Warned,  it  may  be,  by  the  Lord 
Himself,  or  attracted  thither  by  the  near  approach  of  the 
Pentecost,2  the  Apostles  and  those  with  them  return  to 
Jerusalem,  their  hearts  full  of  mighty  presentiments  and 
exalted  hopes.    Yet  again  they  see  their  Mas- 
ter in  the  neighborhood  of  the  Holy  City ;  yet    e0Con,p- Lvkexxiv- 
again  they  hear  from  those  divine  lips  fuller 
and  more  precise  instructions ; 3  they  are  taught  to  gaze 

1  Our  own  hopes  of  the  future,  as  Bp.  Pearson  has  well  observed,  confirm  our 
belief  in  our  Redeemer's  eternal  reign:  "He  hath  promised  to  make  us  kings 
and  priests,  which  honor  we  expect  in  heaven,  believing  we  shall  reign  with 
Him  forever,  and  therefore  forever  must  believe  Him  King.  'The  kingdoms  of 
this  world  are  become  the  kingdoms  of  the  [our]  Lord,  and  of  His  Christ,  and 
He  shall  reign  for  ever  and  ever'  (Rev.  xi.  15),  not  only  to  the  modificated 
eternity  of  His  mediatorship,  so  long  as  there  shall  be  need  of  regal  power  to 
subdue  the  enemies  of  God's  elect;  but  also  to  the  complete  eternity  of  the  dura- 
tion of  His  humanity,  which  for  the  future  is  coetemal  to  His  divinity." — Expos, 
of  Creed,  Art.  VI.  Vol.  ii.  p.  334  sq.  (ed.  Burton). 

2  Some  difficulties  that  have  been  felt  in  the  change  of  place  in  reference  to 
the  earlier  and  later  appearances  of  our  Lord  will  be  modified  if  we  remember 
that  the  period  we  are  considering  was  bounded  by  two  festivals,  which  would 
of  themselves  involve  journeyings  to  and  from  Judrea.  At  first  the  disciples  are 
found  at  Jerusalem,  whither  they  had  gone  with  their  Lord  to  the  least  of  the 
Passover.  A  few  days  after  the  conclusion  of  the  feast  they  leave  the  city,  and, 
in  obedience  to  their  Lord's  command,  go  to  Galilee.  After  the  solemn  appear- 
ance vouchsafed  to  them  in  that  country,  on  the  appointed  mountain,  probably 
towards  the  close  of  the  forty  days,  they  naturally  go  up  to  Jerusalem  to  cele- 
brate the  Pentecost.  In  the  neighborhood  of  that  city  they  see  our  Lord  for  the 
last  time  (Lake  xxiv.  44  sq.),  but  whether  unexpectedly  or  otherwise  we  cannot 
at  all  determine. 

8  It  seems  not  only  perfectly  reasonable  to  suppose  that  Luke  xxiv.  44  sq.  is  to 
be  regarded  as  on  the  same  day  with  Luke  xxiv.  50 — 68,  but  right  to  deem  it 
actually  proved  by  the  opening  verses  of  Acts,  eh.  i.  The  command  to  remain 
in  Jerusalem  must,  according  to  Acts  i.  4,  5,  be  placed  a  few  days  before  the 
Tentecost:  when  we  meet  them  with  the  same  command  in  Luke  xxiv.  49,  are 
we  to  believe  that  the  same  writer  is  so  inconsistent  with  himself  as  to  Imply 
that  it  was  spoken  six  weeks  before  that  festival?  See  Wieseler,  Chron.  Synops. 
p.  423  sq.  The  insinuation  of  Meyer  (vh.  Luc.  p.  511;  see  also  p.  514),  that  St. 
Luke  followed  one  traditionary  account  of  the  ascension  in  his  Gospel  and 
in  other  in  the  Acts,  is  a  truly  hopeless  way  of  avoiding  the  force  of  a  very  just 
Uld  mtv  reasonable  inference. 


370  THE   FORTY   DATS.  Lect.  VIII. 

backward  down  the  great  vistas  of  the  prophetic  Scrip- 
tures, to  understand  and  to  believe.  Again, 
too,  they  hear  transcendent  promises,  prom- 
ises .of  drifts  and   blessiners   now  exceeding 

Acts  i.  5.  . 

nigh,  but  even  yet  they  partially  misunder- 
stand, and  vaguely  question.1     Such  inquiries,  however,  are 
solemnly  silenced ;  they  are  to  be  the  Lord's 
witnesses ;  they  are  not  to  expect  an  earthly 
kingdom,  but  to  prepare  others  for  a  heavenly  kingdom. 
They  marvel  and  they  follow.2 . . .  They  now 
stand  on  the  mountain  down  which  the  tri- 
umphal entry  had  swept  into  the  earthly  Jerusalem,  and 
from  which  the  triumphal  entry  into  the  heavenly  Jeru- 
salem, and  the  celestial  realms  beyond,3  shall  be  beheld 
by  the  same  chosen  witnesses.     They  follow  their  Lord 
even  to  the  borders  of  the  district  of  Bethany,4  and  then, 
even  while  His  uplifted  hands  are  confirming  with  a  bless- 


1  For  some  comments  on  the  nature  of  the  expectations  of  the  Jews  in  refer- 
ence to  the  Messiah's  reign,  see  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Act.  i.  6.  The  supposi- 
tion, however,  of  this  able  expositor,  that  the  question  of  the  Apostles  involved 
a  kind  of  deprecation  of  the  present  establishment  of  such  a  kingdom  ("  an  jam, 
Domine  reguum  iis  restitues,  qui  te  sic  tractarunt? :')  is  neither  probable  nor  in 
accordance  with  the  context. 

2  The  term  i£riyayei>  (Luke  xxiv.  50)  refers  to  the  scene  of  the  commencement 
of  this  interview,  from  which  our  Lord  conducted  His  disciples  towards  Beth- 
any. This  may  have  been  either  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  city,  or  more  proba- 
bly in  the  city;  perhaps  in  the  same  room,  with  its  closed  doors,  where  the  Lord 
had  already  appeared  twice  before  (John  xx.  19,  26). 

3  Comp.  Heb.  iv.  14,  8ie \r]\v&6Ta  robs  ovpavovs,  where  there  seems  no  reason 
to  consider  the  plural  as  without  its  proper  force,  especially  when  compared 
with  Eph.  iv.  10,  6  ai>afias  inrepdva)  irdvrwv  rS>v  ovpdvoiv  :  "Whatsoever 
heaven  there  is  higher  than  all  the  rest  which  are  called  heavens,  whatsoever 
sanctuary  is  holier  than  all  which  are  called  holies,  whatsoever  place  is  of  great- 
est dignity  in  all  those  courts  above,  into  that  place  did  He  ascend,  where,  in 
the  splendor  of  His  deity,  He  was  before  He  took  upon  Him  our  humanity."  — 
Pearson,  Expos,  of  Creed,  Art.  vi.  Vol.  ii.  p.  320  (ed.  Burton). 

4  There  seems  no  sufficient  reason  for  calling  in  question  the  ancient  tradition 
that  our  Lord  ascended  from  the  Mount  of  Olives.  The  usual  arguments, 
founded  on  the  eus  els  &r)baviai>  of  Luke  xxiv.  50  (Robinson,  Palest.  Vol.  i.  pp. 
416)  are  not  by  any  means  conclusive,  as  it  seems  fairly  probable  that  the  words 
are  not  to  be  limited  to  the  actual  village,  but  generally  referred  to  the  brow  or 
side  of  the  hill,  where  the  road  strikes  downward  to  Bethany.  Comp.  Acts  i.  12, 
and  see  Lightfoot,  Hor.  Hebr.  in  Luc.  xxiv.  50,  Meyer,  ub.  Aposte/gescli.  i.  12, 
Williams,  Holy  City,  Vol.  ii.  p.  440  sq. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE  FORTY   DAYS.  371 

ing  the  words  of  the  last  promise,  they  behold  Ilim  part- 
ing from  them,  rising  from  Olivet  higher  and 
yet  higher,  still  rising  and  still  blessing,  until 

JO'  o  *-"  Acts  i.  9. 

the  cloud 1  receives  Ilim  from  their  sight, 
and  angelic  voices  address  to  them  those  words  of  mingled 
warning,  consolation,  and  prophecy,  "  Why  stand  ye  gaz- 
ing up  into  heaven  ?     This  same  Jesus  which  is  taken  up 
from  you  into  heaven,  shall  so  come  in  like 
manner  as  ye  have  seen  Him  go  into  heaven."       _er'    '..  „„ 

J  °  Rev.  xxji.  20. 

Even  so,  come,  Lord  Jesus;    come  quickly. 
Amen. 

And  now  let  us  bring  these  meditations  to  their  close, 
yet  not  without  the  expression  of  an  earnest 

"  Conclusion. 

hope  that  they  may  have  in   some   degree 
tended  to  remove  a  few  of  the  doubts  and  difficulties,  which 
even  the  sober  and  the  thoughtful  have  sometimes  felt  with 
regard  to  the  connection  of  this  portion  of  the  Evangelical 
history.2     Above  all  things,  may  it  have  been  granted  to 

1  The  cloud  in  which  our  Redeemer  ascended  was  not  only,  as  Stier  suggests, 
typical  of  that  cloud  in  which  He  will  visibly  return  (if  vetptAy,  Luke  xxi.  27), 
but  also  directs  the  thought  to  the  mystery  of  the  assumption  of  the  faithful 
servants  of  Christ  who  at  His  second  coming  will  be  caught  up  "in  clouds"' 
(eV  vetpeKats,  1  Thess.  iv.  17)  to  meet  their  Lord  in  the  air.  Compare  Lect.  IV. 
p.  217,  note  1.  It  may  be  remarked  further  that  if  the  words  avftpepero  ds  rbf 
ovpavbv  (Luke  xxiv  61)  be  received  as  genuine,  of  which,  supported  as  they  are 
by  external  authority,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  (Tisch.  rejects  them  on 
most  insufficient  grounds),  we  have  the  gradual  ascent  upwards  ( avecpepero, 
imperf.)  vividly  put  before  us:  the  Lord  is  parted  from  His  disciples,  and  is 
beheld  being  borne  upwards,  till  the  cloud  at  length  intercepts  Him  from  the 
view  of  the  watchers  beneath. 

-  If  the  views  advanced  in  the  preceding  pages  be  accepted,  it  would  seem 
that  in  the  Gospels  we  have  in  all  notices  of  nine  appearances  of  our  Lord  after 
His  resurrection  ;  (l)to  Mary  Magdalene;  (2)  to  the  other  ministering  women;  (3) 
to  the  two  disciples  journeying  to  Emmaus;  (•!)  to  St.  I'eter;  (5)  to  the  ten  Apos- 
tles; (6J  to  the  eleven  Apostles;  (7)  to  seven  Apostles  by  the  sea  of  Tiberias;  (8) 
to  the  eleven  Apostles,  and  probably  many  others,  on  the  appointed  mountain; 
(9)  tn  the  Apostles  in  or  near  Jerusalem,  immediately  previous  to  the  ascension. 
Besides  these,  we  learn  from  St.  I'aul  (10)  that  an  appearance  of  our  Lord  was 
vouchsafed  to  James  (1  Cor.  xv.  7).  This,  if  we  conceive  the  passage  to  be  writ- 
ten with  reference  to  chronological  order,  would  seem  to  have  been  shortly 
after  the  appearance  to  the  live  hundred  brethren.  The  agreement  of  this 
enumeration  of  St.  I'aul  with  the  record  of  the  appearances  to  msn,  as  recorded 
in  the  Gospels,  is  very  striking,  and  has  been  rightly  put  forward  by  Wieseler, 
Citron.  Synops.  p.  413  sq.    Comp.  Ebrard,  Kritih  <hr  Ev.  Gesch.  §  113,  p.  C9D. 


372  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lkct.  VIII. 

these  humble  words  that  they  may  have  brought  home  to 
those  who  have  dwelt  on  them  the  living  reality  of  the  mys- 
teries of  these  Forty  Days,  the  plain  and  objective  truth  of 
the  Lord's  appearances  on  earth  after  His  resurrection,  and 
the  actual,  visible,  and  bodily  nature  of  His  ascension.1 
On  such  truths  rest  the  surest  consolations  of  the  present ; 
on  such  the  holiest  hopes  of  the  future.2  O,  may  God's 
Spirit,  in  these  latter  days  of  scepticism  and  incredulity, 
move  the  hearts  of  His  ministers  and  His  people  to  hold 
more  truly  and  tenaciously  that  living  truth,  which  alone 
rests  for  its  basis  on  the  literal  truth  of  the  resurrection 
and  ascension  of  our  Lord,  —  that  truth  which  an  Apos- 


1  On  this  subject  it  is  painful  to  feel  how  much  half-belief  prevails  at  the 
present  day,  even  among  these  expositors  of  Scripture  who  have  in  other 
respects  some  claim  on  our  attention.  See,  for  instance,  the  remarks  of  Meyer, 
ub  Luc.  p.  514  sq.  (ed.  3).  The  fact  itself  is  not  questioned,  nay,  even  the  exalta- 
tion of  the  Lord's  glorified  body  is  admitted ;  but  the  distinct  statements  of  one 
Evangelist,  and  the  implied  statements  of  a  second  (Mark  xvi.  19),  that  this 
exaltation  took  place  visibly,  and  before  the  eyes  of  appointed  witnesses,  is  flatly 
denied.  Why  so,  we  ask,  when  so  much  is,  as  it  ought  to  be,  accepted  as  true? 
For  an  answer  we  are  referred  to  the  silence  of  the  two  Apostolical  Evangelists. 
See  Meyer,  loc.  cit.  p.  515  sq.  But  even  if  we  concede  such  a  silence,  which, 
indeed,  we  need  not  concede  (what  meaning,  for  instance,  could  St.  John  have 
assigned  to  our  Lord's  words,  ch.  vi.  62,  if  he  had  not  seen  how  they  were  ful- 
filled?),—  conceding  it,  however,  for  the  sake  of  our  argument,  what  are  we  to 
say  of  a  mode  of  criticism  which,  in  a  history  where  three  out  of  the  four 
■writers  of  it  are  almost  avowedly  selective,  is  prepared  to  reject  a  miracle  when- 
ever two  out  of  four  alone  relate  it?  If  it  be  replied  that  this  is  no  common 
miracle,  but,  like  the  resurrection,  forms  an  epoch  in  our  Lord's  life  of  the  high- 
est importance,  the  rejoinder  seems  as  final  as  it  is  true,  that  the  sacred  writers 
viewed  the  ascension  as  a  necessary  part  and  sequel  of  the  resurrection,  and 
that  it  is  only  the  unsound  theology  of  later  times  that  has  sought  to  separate 
them.  See  above,  p.  337,  and  for  further  comments,  see  Olshausen,  Commentary, 
Vol.  iv.  p.  353  sq.,  Lange,  Leben  Jesit,  II.  8.  10,  Tart  in.  p.  1760  sq.,  Ebrard,  Krit. 
der  Ev.  Gesch.  $  113.  4,  p.  599  sq. 

2  Well  and  wisely  has  Bp.  Pearson  dwelt  upon  that  truth  to  which  the  ancient 
writers  have  invariably  given  such  prominence  when  treating  upon  the  ascen- 
sion, viz.,  that  the  bodily  ascension  of  our  Lord  into  heaven  is  the  strongest 
corroboration  of  our  own  hope  of  ascending  thither.  See  Expos,  of  Creed,  Art. 
vi.  Vol.  i.  p.  321  (ed.  Burton).  That  "  where  the  Head  is  gone  there  the  mem- 
bers may  hope  to  follow,"  is  the  inference  which  all  sound  expositors  have 
drawn,  alike  from  the  nature  of  our  union  with  our  Lord,  and  from  the  eternal 
truth  that  He  has  vouchsafed  in  His  own  person  to  take  our  glorified  humanity 
to  His  Father's  throne.  Compare  Augustine,  Serm.  cclxiii.  3,  Vol.  v.  p.  1210 
(ed.  Migne),  and  a  sound  sermon  by  Beveridge,  Serm.  lxxvi.  Vol.  iii.  p.  432  sq. 
(A-C.  L.). 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  373 

tie  has  declared  to  us, —  even  that  our  Master  has  raised 
us  with  Himself  and  made  us  in  spirit  ascend 
with  Himself  to  His  Father's  kingdom,  and 
sit  there  the  partakers  of  His  glory  and  His  blessedness.1 
Where  the  Plead  is,  even  there  has  He  solemnly  assured  us 
the  true  members  now  are  in  spirit.  We  are  already 
seated  there  in  Him,  —  that  is  the  support  and  consolation 
of  the  present ;  we  shall  hereafter  be  made  to  sit  there  by 
Him,  not  in  spirit  only,  but  in  our  glorified  human  nature, 
—  that  is  the  hope  and  joy  of  the  future.2 

Present  and  future  are  alike  bound  up  in  our  belief  of 
our  Master's  resurrection  and  ascension  ;  and  dreary  indeed 
must  this  present  be,  and  gloomy  and  clouded  that  future, 
if  our  belief  in  our  risen  and  our  ascended  Lord  be  uncer- 
tain, partial,  or  precarious.  We  may  think,  perchance,  that 
we  are  free  to  speculate,  to  poise  historical  credibilities,  to 
boast  the  liberty  of  a  suspended  assent  to  what  seems  all 
too  objective  and  material  for  the  falsely  spiritualizing  ten- 
dencies of  the  age  in  which  we  live.3     We  may  think  so 


l  No  words  can  be  more  distinct  than  those  which  the  Apostle  uses  in  the 
passage  above  referred  to,  —  Ka\  a\jvr\ynpiv  ko.1  o-weKdSiaev  iv  ro7s  iirovpaviois 
(Eph.  ii.  6).  Though  the  passage,  considered  in  oue  sense,  may  refer  to  what  is 
yet  future,  yet  in  another  and  a  spiritual  sense,  it  is  eternally  true  that  the  faith- 
ful believer  in  Jesus  Christ  has  even  now  been  raised  with  His  Lord,  and  in 
spirit  made  t"o  sit  with  Him  and  in  Him  in  the  realms  of  His  blessedness  and 
glory ;  ttjj  KtcpaKr/s  Kade£b/ue'e7js  Ka\  rb  aw/j.a  (TuyKci^Tar  5tb  iTTTjyayef  iv 
XpHTTw  'lria-ov.    Chrysost.  in  loc.    See  also  Commentary  on  Eph.  p.  38  (ed.  2). 

-  "  Even  now  we  sit  there  in  Him,  and  shall  sit  there  with  Him  in  the  end.  So 
lie  promiseth,  in  express  terms,  that  'we  shall  sit  with  Him  in  His  throne' 
(Rev.  iii.  21),  as  He  doth  in  His  Father's.  And  so,  not  in  the  throne  will  he  be 
above  us,  but  only  that  He  in  the  midst,  and  we  on  His  right  hand."'  —  An- 
drewes,  Sunn.  vn.  Vol.  i.  p.  115  (A.-C.  L.). 

3  It  is,  alas!  not  only  the  heretics  of  the  past  (sec  Augustine,  de  liar.  cap.  59, 
Vol.  viii.  p.  41,  Theodoret,  Hizret.  Fab.  i.  19)  who  have  felt  and  expressed  diffi- 
culties on  the  subject  of  our  Lord's  body  being  taken  up  into  heaven.  Modern 
writers,  who  on  other  points  have  shown  themselves  sound  and  thoughtful 
expositors  of  Scripture,  have  here  not  scrupled  to  use  language  sadly  analogous 
to  the  language  of  the  past,  and  have  sought  for  imaginary  places  where  they 
might  assume  that  the  "final  residuum  of  the  corporeity"  of  the  Lord  was 
deposited  on  Sis  ascent  to  the  Father.  See  the  references  in  Stier,  DUc.  of  our 
Lord,  Vol.  viii.  p.  442  (Clark),  and  on  the  subject  generally,  Angustine,  Epist. 
ccv.  Vol.  ii.  p.  942  sq.,  to  which  add  the  wise  caution,  de  Fide  et  Sijmb.  cap.  6, 
Vol.  vi.  p.  188  (ed.  Mignc). 

32 


o  l  4  THE  FORTY  DAYS.  Lect.  VIII. 

now ;  but  when  the  end  draws  near,  when  sorrows  break 
us,  when  age  weakens,  when  darkness  begins  to  close 
around  us,  where  will  all  such  license  of  thought  be,  and 
what  will  it  avail  us  ?  How  shall  dust  and  ashes  hope  to 
ascend  into  the  heaven  of  heavens,  if  it  cannot  feel  with 
all  the  fulness  of  conviction  that  One  who  was  bone  of 
our  bone  and  flesh  of  our  flesh  has  entered  those  realms 
before  us,  and  has  taken  up  our  very  nature,  glorified  and 
beautified,  to  the  right  hand  of  the  everlasting  Father  ? * 

May,  then,  the  belief  in  the  resurrection  and  in  all  its 
attendant  mysteries   become   in   the   heart  of  every  one 
whose  eye  may  fall  on  these  concluding  words  of  an  ear- 
nest, though,  God  knoweth,  poor  and  weak  effort  to  set 
forth  His  truth,  ever  truer  and  ever  fresher.     May  it  call 
up  our  thoughts  and  affections  to  His  throne, 
ever  teaching  us  to  ascend  heavenward  in 
soul  and  spirit  now,  to  learn  the  path,  and  to  know  the 
way,  that  so  we  may  ascend  in  body,  soul,  and  spirit  here- 
after ;  yea,  and  not  ascend  only,  but  abide  there  with  Him 
forevermore,  redeemed,  justified,  sanctified,  glorified,  the 
.   „  bidden  and  welcome  guests  at  the  marriage- 

Rev.  xix.  9.  .  . 

supper  of  the  Lamb,  the  admitted  inheritors 
of  the  kingdom  prepared  for  us  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world. 

1  To  none  of  tbe  great  truths  relating  to  the  two  natures  of  our  Lord  is  it 
more  necessary  to  adhere  firmly  in  the  present  age  than  to  this.  A  hearty  belief 
in  the  literal  and  local  ascent  of  our  Lord's  humanity  into  the  heavens  is  in 
itself  a  belief  in  the  whole  mystery  of  the  union  of  the  Godhead  and  Manhood. 
If,  as  has  been  truly  said,  in  His  death  our  Lord  has  assured  us  of  His  human- 
it}',  and  in  His  resurrection  has  demonstrated  His  divinity  (Pearson,  Creed,  Vol. 
i.  p.  313,  ed.  Burton),  most  surely  in  His  ascension  has  He  displayed  both.  There 
we  see,  as  it  were,  in  one  what  in  other  places  our  imperfect  nature  rarely  ena- 
bles us  to  contemplate  otherwise  than  under  separate  relations.  In  that  last 
scene  we  realize  all,  —  the  human,  the  divine,  and  the  most  complete  manifesta- 
tion of  their  union.  It  is  more  as  a  man  that  we  see  Him  leading  His  disciples 
out  of  Jerusalem,  and  walking,  for  the  last  time,  up  the  slopes  of  Olivet;  it  is 
more  as  God  that,  with  the  eye  of  faith,  we  behold  Him  taking  His  seat  on  His 
Father's  throne;  it  is,  however,  as  the  God-man  in  its  truest  aspects  that  we 
gaze  on  Him  ascending,  flesh  of  our  flesh,  and  yet  God  blessed  forever,  —  man 
in  the  form  that  rises,  God  in  the  power  that  bears  Him  to  His  Father's  throne: 
"corpus  levatum  est  in  caelum  illo  levante  qui  ascendit."  —  August,  de  Agon. 
Chr.  25,  Vol.  vi.  p.  304. 


Lect.  VIII.  THE   FORTY   DAYS.  375 

O  holy  Jesus,1  who  for  our  sakes  didst  suffer  incompara- 
ble anguish  and  pains,  commensurate  to  thy  love  and  our 
miseries,  which  were  infinite,  that  thou  mightest  purchase 
for  us  blessings  upon  earth  and  an  inheritance  in  heaven, 
dispose  us  by  love,  thankfulness,  humility,  and  obedience, 
to  receive  all  the  benefit  of  thy  passion,  granting  unto 
us  and  thy  whole  Church  remission  of  all  our  sins,  in- 
tegrity of  mind,  health  of  body,  competent  maintenance, 
peace  in  our  days,  a  temperate  air,  fruitfulness  of  the  earth, 
unity  and  integrity  of  faith,  extirpation  of  heresies,  recon- 
cilement of  schisms,  and  destruction  of  all  wicked  counsels 
intended  against  us.  Multiply  thy  blessings  upon  us,  holy 
Jesus :  increase  in  us  true  religion,  sincere  and  actual  devo- 
tion in  our  prayers,  patience  in  troubles,  and  whatsoever 
is  necessary  to  our  soul's  health,  or  conducing  to  thy  glory. 
Amen. 

1  This  beautiful  and  catholic  prayer  is  taken  from  Bp.  Jeremy  Taylor's  Life  of 
I  Ttrist,  in.  15,  Vol.  i.  p.  340  (Lond.  1836). 


INDEX 


Adultery,  woman  taken  in, 232;  nar- 
rative not  written  by  St.  John,  232, 
«.;  probable  place  in  the  Gospel 
history,  281  ;  nature  of  the  strata- 
gem, 282;  punishment  of,  282  n. 

Agony  in  the  Garden,  297;  nature 
of  the  deprecatory  prayer,  297  n.\ 
ministry  of  the  angel,  298  n. 

Alpii.eus,  identical  witliClopns,  101  n. 

Angels,  57;  number  of,  at  the  sepul- 
chre, 343  n.\  significant  attitude, 
346  ». 

Anna,  the  prophetess,  76. 

Annas,  short  history  of,  300  n.\  our 
Lord's  examination  before,  300. 

Antonia,  tower  of,  275  n. 

Apocryphal  Infancies,  99. 

Apostles,  sending  forth  of,  182;  dura- 
tion of  their  circuit,  182  n. ;  slowness 
of  to  believe  in  resurrection,  349. 

Appearances,  our  Lord's  to  Mary 
Magdalene,  346;  to  the  other  minis- 
tering women,  350;  to  the  two  disci- 
ples, 352;  to  the  ten  Apostles,  3">7; 
to  St.  Peter,  357  n. ;  to  the  eleven 
Apostles,  361;  to  disciples  on  the  lake 
of  Gcnnesareth,  362;  to  the  five  hun- 
dred brethren,  367;  last,  previous  to 
ascension,  369. 

Ascension,  festival  of,  338  w. ;  descrip- 
tion of,  370-71;  probable  place  of, 
370  n.;  literal  and  local,  372  n.;  half- 
belief  in  the  doctrine  of,  372  n. ;  great 
importance  of  a  right  belief  in,  ib. 

Atonement,  its  connection  with  our 
Lord's  divinity,  21  n. ;  hortatory  com- 
ments on,  329. 

Baptism,  our  Lord's,  110;  probable 
date  of,  106  n. ;  probable  locality  of, 
108  n. 

32* 


Barabras,  311  n. ;  origin  of  custom 
which  led  to  his  escape,  312. 

Beeroth,  94. 

Bethany,  date  of  our  Lord's  last  ar- 
rival at,  252  n. ;  supper  at,  257;  posi- 
tion of,  258  n. ;  roads  from  to  Jerusa- 
lem, 260  n. 

Beth esd a,  pool  of,  136  7^. ;  etymology 
of,  136  re. 

Bethabara,  108  «.,  240  n. 

Bethlehem,  70  n. 

Bethphaoe,  probable  site  of,  260  n. 

Bethsaida-Julias,  184  n. ;  two  places 
of  that  name,  194  n. 

Betrayal  of  our  Lord,  299;  circum- 
stances which  immediately  followed, 
300. 

Binding  and  loosing,  power  of,  357  »., 
360  n. 

Brethren  of  our  Lord,  100  n. ;  im- 
portunity of  and  imperfect  faith,  227. 

CwESarea  TniLiPPi,  208  n. ;  events 
which  took  place  in  its  vicinity,  209. 

Caiaphas,  prophecy  of,  246  n.;  ex- 
amination of  our  Lord.  304. 

(ana,  117  n.\  miracle  at,  117. 

Canticles  in  Luke  i.,64;  inspiration 
and  characteristics  of,  64. 

Capernaum,  site  of,  121m.;  nobleman 
of,  132. 

Circuits,  our  Lord's,  round  Galilee, 
161  ?!.;  length  of,  174  n. 

Civilization,  theories  of,  22  n. 

Christ,  early  development  of,  90;  ad- 
vance of  in  wisdom,  91  ii.;  Supposed 
outward  appearance  of,  92;  visit  of 
to  temple  when  twelve  years  old,  93; 
youth  of,  97;  reserve  hereon  of  the 
Evangelists,  100;  spiritual  and  mental 
development  of,  102;  a  reader  of  the 


378 


INDEX 


heart,  125  n.  •  reception  of  his  teach- 
ing, 143  n. ;  date  of  his  return  to 
Galilee,  144  n. ;  duration  of  ministry, 
145  n. ;  visit  to  Jerusalem  at  Feast  of 
Tabernacles,  226;  deportment  of  be- 
fore his  judges,  303  n. ;  nature  of  last 
agonies,  321;  last  words  on  the  cross, 
322  n. ;  nature  of  death,  326  n. ;  burial 
of,  327;  recognition  of  not  always 
permitted  after  the  resurrection,  346 
«. ;  how  this  is  to  be  explained,  355; 
appearance  of  after  resurrection 
somewhat  changed,  355  n. ;  bodily 
nature  of  his  ascension,  371;  his 
eternal  reign,  369  n. 

Clkopas,  353  n. 

Clopas,  wiie  of,  319  n. 

Clothes,  casting  down  of,  262  n. ; 
rending  of,  305  n. 

Cock-crowing,  302  n. 

Coincidences,  verbal,  in  the  four  Gos- 
pels, 255  n. 

Corn,  rubbing  ears  of,  166  n. 

Cross,  form  of,  318  n. 

Dalmanutha,  site  of,  207  n. 

Darkness,  supernatural,  at  the  cruci- 
fixion, 320  n. 

Decapolis,  confederation  of,  192  n. 

Dedication,  feast  of,  237  n. 

Demoniacs,  healing  of,  how  charac- 
terized, 156  ii.;  boy,  healing  of,  211; 
Gergesene,  178. 

Disciples,  first  that  joined  our  Lord, 
117  n. ;  the  two  journeying  to  Em- 
maus,  353  n. 

Discourses  of  our  Lord,  their  order 
doubtful,  24  ii. ;  delivered  in  the  syn- 
agogue at  Capernaum,  197  B.j  our 
Lord's  last,  295  n. 

Doctors,  Jewish,  names  of  those  alive 
when  our  Lord  was  twelve  years  old, 
90. 

E  a  stern  world  ,  expectations  of,  55  n. 

E.mmaus,  position  of,  353  ». ;  distance 
of  from  Jerusalem,  354  n. 

Ephraim,  site  of,  246  n. 

Essene  teaching,  103. 

Eucharist,  institution  of,  294;  proba- 
bly not  partaken  of  by  Judas,  294  n. 

Eusebius,  on  the  relations  of  the  four 
Gospels,  146. 


Fig-tree,  cursing  of,  267;  objections 
urged  against,  268  n. 

Fish,  constellation  of,  79  n. 

Five  thousand,  feeding  of,  184. 

Flight  into  Egypt,  date  of,  and  du- 
ration of  stay,  85  ii. 

Four  thousand,  feeding  of,  205;  site 
of  the  miracle,  205  n. 

Gabbatha,  312  ii. 

Galilee,  divisions  of,  187  n. ;  Christ's 
appearances  in,  337  n. ;  the  mountain 
in,  where  probably  situated,  367  n. 

Genealogies,  comments  on,  99  ». 

Gennesareth,  lake  of,  storms  on, 
177  ii. 

Gennesareth,  plain  of,  155  n. 

Gergesa,  probable  site  of,  178  n. 

Gethsemane,  296  ii. 

Golgotha,  site  of,  317  n.;  meaning  of 
the  term,  ib. 

Gospel  history,  mode  of  studying, 
23  m. 

Gospels,  inspiration  of,  27  n. ;  har- 
monies of,  31  n. ;  correct  principles 
of  a  harmony  of,  34;  apocryphal, 
256  ii. ;  characteristics  of  contrasted 
and  compared,  46  w.;  discrepancies 
of  unduly  exaggerated,  50  n. 

Grave-clothes,  position  of,  in  the 
sepulchre,  345  n. 

Greeks,  petition  of,  to  see  our  Lord, 
286  ii. 

Guards,  bribery  of,  353. 

Harmonists,  errors  of,  32. 
Harvest,  usual  time  of,  107  n. 
Herod  the  Great,  death  of,  81  n. ; 

barbarities  of,  83  n. 
Herod  Antipas,  character  of,  201  n.; 

dismissal  of  our  Lord  to,  310;  wicked 

levity  of,  310  n. ;    mockery  of  our 

Lord,  ib. 
Herodians,  168  n.,  274  n. 
Hillel,  school  of,  249  11. 
IIoly  Ghost,  blasphemy  against,  176 

n.j    gift  of  to  the  Apostles,  357  n., 

361  n. 

Innocents,    murder   of,    83;     silence 

hereon  of  Josephus,  83. 
'IovSouoi,  meaning  of  the  term  in  St. 

John,  115  «.,  137  n. 


INDEX. 


379 


Jacob's  well,  129  n. 

Jairus'  daughter,  healing  of,  180. 

Jerusalem,  our  Lord's  address  to, 
241  n.j  view  of  from  Olivet,  262  n.; 
appearance  of  at  Passover,  203  n. ; 
probable  numbers  assembled  at,  ib.; 
our  Lord'6  apostrophe  to,  241  n  , 
284. 

Jericho,  our  Lord's  visit  to,  251 ;  road 
from  to  Jerusalem,  257  n. 

John  the  Baptist,  104;  date  of  com- 
mencement of  his  ministry,  104  n. ; 
its  effects,  105;  deputation  of  San- 
hedrin  to,  115;  number  of  his  disci- 
ples, 126  n. ;  date  of  captivity  of,  127 
n. ;  message  of  inquiry  to  our  Lord, 
173;  death  of,  when,  183  n. 

John,  St.,  Gospel  of,  30;  character  of, 
229  «.,  250  n. ;  difference  of  from  that 
of  St.  1'eter,  304  n. ;  visit  of  to  the 
sepulchre,  344;  external  characteris- 
tics of,  30  «.;  individuality  of,  51; 
genuineness  of  chap,  x.xi.,  338  n. 

Joseph  of  Arimathea,  326. 

Journeys,  last  three  of  our  Lord  to 
Jerusalem,  224;  their  probable  dates 
and  durations,  225  n. 

Juda,  city  of,  61. 

Jcdas,  death  of,  307  n. ;  sin  of,  307  n. 

Lazarus,  sickness  of,  and  death,  245; 
raising  of,  246  n. ;  effect  produced  by 
the  miracle,  245. 

Legs,  breaking  of,  325  n. 

Levi,  same  as  Matthew,  164  n.j  feast 
in  his  house,  ib. 

Like  of  Christ,  history  of,  a  history 
of  redemption,  26. 

Loins,  cloth  bound  round,  at  the  cru- 
cifixion, 318  ft. 

Luke,  St.,  Gospel  of,  its  external  char- 
acteristics, 29  n.\  individuality  of, 
41;  universality  of,  42  it.;  peculiarity 
of  the  portion  ch.  xi.  51 — xviii.  14, 
219  n.,  222  n. 

Lltiiardt,  Essay  on  St.  John's  Gos- 
pel,  44  ?t. 

Mach-erus,  site  of,  128  n. 

Magdala,  site  of,  207  n. 

HAOI,  adoration  of,  77;  country  of,  77; 
ground  of  their  expectations,  78  n.j 
nature  of  their  expectations,  80  n. 


Mark,  St.,  identical  with  John  Mark, 
38  it. ;  Gospel  of,  its  external  charac- 
teristics, 29;  written  under  the  guid- 
ance of  St.  reter,  29  n.,  212  n. ;  in- 
dividuality of,  37;  graphic  character 
of,  38;  genuineness  of  concluding 
verses,  40  it.,  344  n. 

Marriage-feasts,  customs  at,  118  n. 

Mary  Magdalene,  visit  of  to  the 
sepulchre,  341  n. ;  appearance  of  our 
Lord  to,  346-7. 

Matthew,  St.,  Gospel  of,  its  external 
characteristics,  28;  individuality  of, 
55;  originally  written  in  Hebrew, 
150  n. ;  genuineness  of  first  two  chap- 
ters of,  65  n. ;  order  of  incidents  not 
exact,  148  n.,  151  n. ;  how  this  is  to  be 
accounted  for,  150. 

Messages,  divine,  to  Joseph  and  Mary, 
65. 

Miraculous  conception,  dignity  of, 
52;  mystery  of,  ib. ;  narrative  of,  56; 
not  noticed  by  St.  John,  52. 

Ministry,  our  Lord's,  duration  of, 
145  n. 

Mount,  sermon  on  the,  169;  scene  of, 
169  n. 

Nain,  site  of,  172  n. 

Nativity,  circumstances  of,  69;  exact 
locality  of,  69  n. ;  date  of,  70  n. 

Nazareth,  description  of,  103  n. ;  ill 
repute  of,  57  n. ;  our  Lord's  first 
preaching  at,  152;  second  visit  to, 
181. 

Nicodemus,  history  of,  124  n.;  dis- 
course of  our  Lord  with,  124;  bold- 
ness and  piety  of  at  our  Lord's  burial, 
327. 

Parables,  of  sons  sent  into  vineyard, 
273  «.;  of  wicked  husbandmen,  ib.; 
collection  of,  by  St.  Matthew,  35  n. 

Para  lytic,  healing  of,  162. 

Pilate,  official  character  of,  274  n. ; 
general  character  of,  315  n.;  our 
Lord's  first  appearance  before,  307; 
second  ditto,  311 ;  enmity  with  Herod, 
310  n. ;  awe  felt  by  towards  our 
Lord,  315  n. ;  fate  of,  316  n. 

Pinnacle  ok  the  temple,  115. 

Presentation  in  temple,  73. 

Pbeokpts,  reception  of,  170. 


380 


INDEX 


Precipitation,  Mount  of,  170  n. 

Portents,  at  our  Lord's  death,  323. 

Procurators,  residence  of,  at  Jeru- 
salem, 306  ii. 

Prophecies,  our  Lord's  last,  289  n. 

Protevangelium  Jacobi,  narrative 
of  Nativity,  69  m. 

Puberty,  age  of,  93  n. 

Publicans,  35  m. 

Turim,  feast  of,  our  Lord's  visit  to 
Jerusalem  at,  133;  observances  at, 
134  m. 

Purification,  time  of,  73  n. 

Peter,  St.,  confession  of,  198  m. ;  three 
denials  of  our  Lord,  302  n. ;  visit  of 
to  sepulchre,  344;  character  of  as 
compared  with  that  of  St.  John,  364  m. 

Resurrection,  Christ's,  a  pledge  of 
ours,  332  m. ;  objections  to  doctrine 
of,  331  n. ;  number  of  the  accounts 
of,  334  m. ;  differences  in  the  incidents 
related,  335;  exact  time  of,  340  n. 

Resurrection-body,  nature  of  our 
Lord's,  333  n. ;  glorification  of,  per- 
haps progressive,  356  ».,  366  m. 

Roads,  from  Judsa  to  Galilee,  121  m. 

Roofs,  nature  of,  163  m. 

Sabbath,  observance  of,  137;  second- 
first,  165  n. ;  miracles  performed  on, 
168  m.,  237  m. 

Sabbath-day's  journey,  259  m. 

Sadducees,  errors  of,  278  n. ;  accepted 
other  parts  of  Scripture  beside  Pen- 
tateuch, 279  m. 

Saints,  resurrection  of,  at  our  Lord's 
death,  324  n. 

Salim,  site  of,  126  m. 

Samaria,  our  Lord's  first  journey 
through,  129 ;  second  journey  through, 
228. 

Samaritan  woman,  our  Lord's  dis- 
course with,  129. 

Samaritans,  faith  of,  130;  expectation 
of  a  Messiah,  130  m. 

Sanhedrin,  meeting  of,  called  by 
Herod,  81  m. ;  first  public  manifesta- 
tion of  their  designs,  231 ;  component 
parts  of,  272  m. ;  lost  the  power  of 
life  and  death,  282  n. ;  place  of  meet- 
ing, 303  n. ;  our  Lord's  examination 
before,  302. 


Scape-goat,  supposed  reference   to, 

314  n. 
Scribes,  from  Jerusalem,  162  m. 
Scripture,  inspiration  of,  21  n. 
Sects,  Jewish,  some  characteristics  of, 

72  m. 
Seventy'  disciples,  mission  of,  235  m. 
Shammai,  school  of,  249  m. 
Shekel,    half,   annual    payment    of, 

213  m. 
Shepherds,  announcement  to,  71. 
Sidon,  probably  visited  by  our  Lord. 

203,  215  n. 
Siloam,  well  of,  231  m. 
Simeon,  74  m. ;  prophetic  address  of, 

75  n. 
Simon  the  leper,  258  n. 
Simon  of  Cyrene,  318  n. 
Solomon's  Porch,  238  m. 
Son  of  God,  119  n. ;  meaning  of  the 

title,  198  m.,  234  m.,  238  m., 259  m.,  304  n. 
Sosiosch,  82  m. 

Soul,  meaning  of  the  term,  114  m. 
Spirit,  meaning  of  the  term,  114  m. 
Star  of  the  East,  78;   date  of  ap- 
pearance, 79  m. 
Stone,  great,  rolled  against  the  door 

of  the  sepulchre,  328  n.,  340  n. 
Storm,  stilling  of,  195  n. 
Sufferings,  our  Lord's  predictions  of 

his  own,  256  n. 
Supper,   last,   celebration  of,    291;    a 

paschal  supper,  but  not  on  Nisan  14, 

292  m.;  order  of  incidents,  293  n. 
Sweat,  bloody,  nature  of,  298  m. 
Swine,  destruction  of,  179  n. 
Sychar,  129  m. 

Synagogue,  service  of,  153  m.,  158  m. 
Syrophcenician  woman,  202  n. 

Tabiga,  a  suburb  of  Capernaum,  155 
m.,  158  m. 

Taxing,  under  Quirinus,  66;  Roman  in 
origin,  Jewish  in  form,  68. 

Temple,  first  cleansing  of,  122;  second 
cleansing  of,  266;  veil  of,  323  m. 

Temptation,  scene  of,  110  m. ;  no 
vision,  111;  an  assault  from  without, 
112;  addressed  to  the  three  parts  of 
our  nature,  113. 

Thomas,  St.,  disbelief  of,  361;  testi- 
mony of  to  our  Lord's  divinity,  362  m. 

Thorns,  crown  of,  314  n. 


INDEX. 


J81 


Tombs,  nature  of,  327  n. 
Transfiguration,      210;       probable 

scene  of,  210  n. 
Treasury,  285. 
Triumphal  entry,  2.19. 
Tyre,  our  Lord's  journey  towards,  201. 

Virgin  Mary,  probable  authority  for 
early  portions  of  St.  Luke's  Gospel, 
60  n.  ;  legendary  history  of,  57  n.\ 
relationship  to  Elizabeth,  60  n. ;  char- 
acter of,  00;  journey  of  to  Elizabeth, 
61 ;  later  residence  of,  175  n. 


Washing  of  hands,  Tilatc's,  313  n. 

Wieseler  (K.),  value  of  his  chrono- 
logical labors,  139  n.,  225  n. 

Women,  court  of,  286  «.;  the  minister- 
ing, 335  n. ;  visit  of  to  the  sepulchre, 
339. 

World,  state  of  at  our  Lord's  birth, 
54  n. 

Zacch.eu8,  251 ;   desire  of  to  see  our 

Lord,  251  n. 
Zebedee,  position  of  at  Capernaum, 

156  n. 


382 


INDEX 


PASSAGES   OF   SCRIPTURE 

EXPLAINED     OR     ILLUSTRATED. 


MicAn  v.  2, 

Matt.  ii.  2, 

ii.  9, 


Mark 


Luke 


ii.  13,      . 
ii.  23,  . 
xiii.  58,  . 
xix .  1, 
xxii.  21, 
xxvi.  29, 
xxvi.  45, 
xxviii.  7, 
xxviii.  9, 
xxviii.  17, 
i.  34, 
vi.  3,    . 
vii.  24,     . 
xi.  13, 
xi.  18,     . 

a.,     . 

xi.  25,     . 
xvi.  4, 
xvi.  7,     . 
i.  37,    . 
i.2, 

i.3,      . 
ii.  8, 
ii.  35,   . 
ii.  43,       . 
ii.  44,  . 
ii.  48,       . 
ii.  49,   . 
iii.  1,       . 
iii.  23, 
iv.  39,     . 
ix.  51, . 
xiii.  32,  . 


82  n. 

Luke 

XV.  1,   . 

.  79  n. 

xxii.  70, 

82  m. 

xxiv.  44, 

.  85  n. 

John 

i.  29,  . 

80  n. 

i.  33,   . 

.  193  n. 

ii.  2,  . 

.      248  n. 

ii.  3,  4,  . 

.  277  n. 

ii.  15,  . 

.  295  n. 

ii.  21,   . 

.  298  n. 

iii.  3,  . 

.      343  n. 

iv.  2, 

.  351  n. 

iv.  4,  . 

.      351  n. 

v.  1, 

.  159  7i. 

V.  4,  . 

97  m. 

vi.  50,  . 

.  191  n. 

vii.  4, . 

.   267  n. 

x.  32,   . 

.  209  m. 

xii.  27, 

.      270  n. 

xii.  29,  . 

.  271  n. 

xiii.  5, 

.  .  341  n. 

xvii.  4  sq 

.  343  n. 

xviii.  3, 

59. 

xviii.  24, 

.  149  n. 

xviii.  38, 

.   223  n. 

xix. 11,  . 

.    70  n. 

xix.  12, 

75  n. 

xix.  14, . 

.  94  n. 

xx.  8, 

95  n. 

xx.  17,  . 

.    96  n. 

xx.  17, 

97  ». 

xxi.  19,  . 

.  106  n. 

xxi.  22, 

.      106  n. 

Eph. 

ii.  6, 

.  158  ». 

Col. 

ii.  15.  . 

.   224  n. 

1  Thess.  iv.  17, 

.  241. 

Hkb. 

iv.  14,  . 

243  n. 
305  n. 
305  n. 
116n. 
109  n. 
118  n. 
120. 
122. 

123  m. 

124  m. 
126  m. 
131  M. 
133. 
136  m. 
198  m. 
227  m. 
239  m. 
287  m. 
2S8  m. 
226  m-. 
296  m. 
268  n. 
302  m. 
309  n. 

315  m. 

316  m. 
319  m. 
345  m. 
338  n. 
348  n. 
3G6  m. 
367  n. 
373  m. 
321  m. 
217  m. 
370  ii. 


%\%     &  H  &  . 


0»IaaUt  Witki, 

PUBLISHED     BY 

GOULD     AND     LINCOLN, 

59    WASHINGTON    STREET,    BOSTON. 

"Or^Oo 

CHRISTIAN'S  DAILY  TREASURY:  a  Religious  Exercise  for  every  day 
in  the  year.    By  Rev.  H.  Temple.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

WREATH  AROUND  THE  CROSS;   or,  Scripture  Truths  Illustrated.    By 
Rev.  A.  Morton  Brown,  D.  D.    16mo,  cloth.    60  cents. 

SCHOOL  OF  CHRIST;  or,  Christianity  Viewed  in  its  Leading  Aspects.    By 
Rev  A.  R.  L.  Foote.    16mo,  cloth.    60  cents. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  LIFE,  Social  and  Individual.    By  Peter  Bayne,  M.  A. 
12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  PURITANS;   or,  The  Church,  Court,  and  Parliament  of  England.    By 
Rev.  Samuel  Hopkins.    In  3  vols.,  octavo.    Vol.  I.,  cloth,  ready.    $2.50. 

MODERN  A  THEISM;  under  its  various  forms.  By  James  Buchanan,  D.D. 
12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  MISSION  OF  THE  COMFORTER  ;  with  copious  Notes.    By  Julius 
Charles  Hare.    American  edition ;  Notes  translated.    12mo,  cloth.   $1.25. 

GOD  REVEALED  IN  NATURE  AND  IN  CHRIST.     By  Rev.  James 
B.  Walker.    12mo,  cloth    $1.00. 

PHILOSOPHY  OF  THE  PLAN  OF  SALVATION.     New,  improved, 
and  enlarged  edition.    12mo,  cloth.    75  cents. 

TAHVEH  CHRIST;    or,  The  Memorial  Name.     By  Alex'r  MacWhortek. 
Introductory  Letter  by  Nath'l  W.  Taylor,  D.D.    12mo,  cloth.    60  cents. 

SALVATION  BY  CHRIST:   Discourses  on  some  of  the  most  important 
Doctrines  of  the  Gospel.    By  Francis  Wayland,  D  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

THE  SUFFERING  SA  VIOUR ;  or,  Meditations  on  the  Last  Days  of  Christ. 
By  Frederick  W.  Krummacher,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  GREAT  DAY  OF  ATONEMENT;    or,  Meditations  and  Prayers  on 
the  Sufferings  and  Death  of  our  Lord.    75  cents. 

EXTENT   OF  THE  ATONEMENT  IN   ITS  RELATION   TO   GOD 
AND  THE  UNIVERSE.    By  Thomas  W.  Jenkyn,  D.D.   12mo,  cloth.   $1.00. 

THE   IMITATION   OF   CHRIST.     By  Thomas  a  Kempis.     With  a  Life 
of  a  Kempis,  by  Dr  C.  Ullmann.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cents. 

THE  HARVEST  AND    THE  REAPERS.     Home  Work  for  all,  and  how 
to  do  it.     By  Rev.  Hakvkv  NkwOOMB.     16uio,  cloth.    63  cenUi. 

(41.) 


<£0itlir  Kxia  yinxolit's  fJuMkatbtts. 


(RELIGIOUS.) 


LIMITS   OF  RELIGIOUS    THOUGHT  EXAMINED.      By  Henry   L. 
Mansel,  B  D.    Notes  translated  for  American  ed.    12mo,  cL    $.100. 

THE    Cli  UCIBLE;   or,  Tests  of  a  Regenerate  State.    By  Bey.  J.  A.  Goodhue. 
Introduction  by  Dr.  Kirk.     12mo,  cloth.     $1.00. 

LEADERS    OF    THE    REFORMATION.      Luther  -  Calvin  -  Latimer  - 
Knox.    By  John  Tulloch,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

BARON  STOW.     Christian  Brotherhood.    16mo,  cloth.    50  cents. 
First  Things,-  or,  the  Development  of  Church   Life. 


16mo,  cloth.    60  cents. 

JOnN  ANGELL    JAMES.  Church  Members  Guide.     Cloth.    33cts. 

Church  in  Earnest.    l8mo,  cloth.   40  cts. 

QntisTiAN  Progress.    Sequel  to  the  Anxi- 


ous Inquirer.    18mo,  cloth.    31  cents. 

THE  GREA  T  CONCERN.     By  N.  Adams,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cents. 

JOHN  HARRIS'S  WORKS.      The   Great   Teacher.     With  an  Intro- 
ductory Essay  by  H.  Humphrey,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cents. 

The  Great  Commission.    With  an  Intro- 
ductory Essay  by  William  R.  Williams,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 


The  PRE-ADAJnTE  Earth.    Contributions 


to  Theological  Science.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 
MAN  PRIMEVAL:      Constitution  and  Prim- 


itive Condition  of  the  Human  Being.    Portrait  of  Author.  12mo,  cloth.   $1.25. 
PATRIARCHY;   or,  The  Family,  its  Constitu- 


tion and  Probation.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

■ Sermons,  Charges,  Addresses,  <fc.    Two 

volumes,  octavo,  cloth.    $1.00  each. 

WILLIAM  R.  WILLIAMS.    Religious  Progress.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cts. 

" ■    Lectures  on  the  Lord's  Prater.   l2mo, 

cloth.    85  cents. 

THE  BETTER  LAND.    By  Rev.  A.  C.  Thompson.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cents 

EVENING    OF  LIFE;    or,  Light  and  Comfort  amid  the  Shadows  of  Declin- 
ing Years.    By  Jeremiah  Chaplin,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

HEAVEN.     By  James  William  Kimball.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

THE  SAINT'S  EVERLASTING  REST.     Baxter.    16mo,  cl.    50  cts. 

(48) 


6 onto  auto  ^mcoln's  ^publications. 


(RELIGIOUS.) 


GO  TTTIOLD'S  EMBLEMS ;  or,  Invisible  Things  Understood  by  Things  that 
are  Made.  By  Christian  Scriver.  Tr.  from  the  28th  German  Ed.  by 
Rev.  Robert  Mknzies.  8vo,  cloth,  $1.00  Fine  Edition,  tinted  Taper, 
royal  8\o,  cloth,  $1.80. 

THE  STILL  110  UR ;  or,  Communion  with  God.  By  Prof.  Austin  Tuelps, 
D.  D.,  of  Andovcr  Theological  Seminary.    lOmo,  cloth.    38  cents. 

LESSONS  AT  THE  CROSS;  or,  Spiritual  Truths  Familiarly  Exhibited  in 
their  Relations  to  Christ.  By  Samuel  Hopkins,  author  of  "  The  Puritans," 
etc.    Introduction  by  George  W.  Blagden,  D.  D.    16mo,  cloth.    75  cents. 

SEW  ENGLAND  THEOCRACY.  From  the  German  of  Uhden's  History 
of  the  Congregationalists  of  New  England.  Introduction  by  Neander. 
By  Mrs.  EL.  C.  Conant.     12nio,  cloth.     $1.00. 

EVENINGS  WITH  THE  DOCTRINES.  By  Rev.  Nehemiah  Adams, 
D.  D.    12mo,  cloth. 

THE  STATE  OF  THE  IMPENITENT  DEAD.  By  Alvah  Hovey, 
D.  D.,  Prof,  of  Christian  Theology  in  Newton  Theol.  Inst.  16mo,  cloth. 
50  cents. 

FOOTSTEPS  OF  OUR  FOREFATHERS;  what  they  Suffered  and  what 
they  Sought.  Describing  Localities,  Personages,  and  Events,  in  the  Struggles 
for  Religious  Liberty.  By  James  G.  Miai.l.  Illustrations.  12mo,  cloth. 
$1.00. 

MEMORIALS  OF  EARLY  CHRISTIANITY.  Presenting,  in  a  graphic 
form,  Memorable  Events  of  Early  Ecclesiastical  History,  etc.  By  Rev.  J. 
G.  Miall.    With  Illustrations.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

THE  MISSIONARY  ENTERPRISE.  The  most  important  Discourses  in 
the  language  on  Christian  Missions,  by  distinguished  American  Authors- 
Edited  by  Baron  Stow,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    85  cents. 

THE  RELIGIONS  OF  THE  W 0 RLD,  and  their  Relations  to  Christianity. 
By  Frederick  Denison  Maurice,  Prof,  of  Divinity  in  King's  Coll.,  Lon- 
don.   16mo,  cloth.    60  cents. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  WORLD  UNMASKED.  By  John  Berridoe,  A.  M., 
Vicar  of  Everton,  Bedfordshire.  With  a  Life  of  the  Author,  by  Rev. 
Thomas  Guthrie,  D.  D.    16mo,  cloth.    50  cents. 

THE  EXCELLENT  WOMAN,  as  described  in  the  Book  of  Proverbs.  With 
an  Introduction  by  W.  B.  Sprague,  D.  D.  Twenty-four  splendid  Illustra- 
tions.   12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

MO  THER8  OF  THE  WISE  AND  GOOD.  By  Jabez  Burns,  D.  D.  16mo, 
cloth.    75  cents. 

THE  SIGNET-RING,  and  its  Heavenly  Motto.  From  the  German.  Illus- 
trated.   lGmo,  cloth,  gilt.    31  cents. 

THE  MARRIAGE-RING;  or,- How  to  Make  Home  Happy.  From  the  writ- 
ings of  John  Angell  James.  Beautifully  Illustrated  edition.  lOmo, 
cloth,  gilt.    75  cents. 

(5») 


(LITERARY.) 


THE  PURITANS;  or,  the  Court,  Church,  and  Parliament  of  England-  By 
Samuel  Hopkins.    3  vols.,  8vo,  cloth.    $2.00  per  volume. 

HISTORICAL  EVIDENCES  OF  THE  TRUTH  OF  THE  SCRIPT  UPS 
RECORDS,  STATED  ANEW,  with  Special  Reference  to  the  Doubts  ar  \ 
Discoveries  of  Modern  Times.  Bampton  Lecture  for  1859.  By  GKOittf  * 
Rawlinson.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

CHRIST  IN  HISTORY.     By  Robert  Turnbull,  D.  D.    A  New  and  E* 
larged  Edition.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  CHRISTIAN  LIFE;  Social  and  Individual.  By  Peter  Bayn* 
12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

ESSAYS  IN  BIOGRAPHY  AND  CRITICISM.  By  Peter  Bayne.  Ar- 
ranged  in  two  series,  or  parts.    2  vols.,  12mo,  cloth.    $1.25  each. 

THE  GREYSON  LETTERS.  By  Henry  Rogers,  Author  of  the  "Eclipse 
of  Faith."    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

CHAMBERS'  WORKS.  Cyclopaedia  of  English  Literature.  Se» 
lections  from  English  Authors,  from  the  earliest  to  the  present  time.  2  vols., 
8vo,  cloth.    $5.00. 

Miscellany  of  Useful  and  Entertaining 

Knowledge.   10  vols.,  l6mo,  cloth.    $7.50. 

■ HOME   BOOK;    or,  Pocket  Miscellany.     6  vols., 

16mo,  cloth.    $3.00 

THE  PREACHER  AND  THE  KING;  or,  Bourdaloue  in  the  Court  of 
Louis  XIV.    By  L.  F.  Bungener.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  PRIEST  AND  THE  HUGUENOT;  or,  Persecution  in  the  age  of 
Louis  XV.    By  L.  F.  Bungener.    2  vols,  12mo,  cloth.    $2.25. 

MISCELLANIES.     By  William  R.  Williams,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

ANCIENT  LITERA  TURE  AND  ART.  Essays  and  Letters  from  Eminent 
Philologists.    By  Profs.  Sears,  Edwards,  and  Felton.  12mo,  cloth.   $1  25. 

MODERN  FRENCH  LITERATURE.  By  L.  Raymond  De  Vericour. 
Revised,  with  Notes  by  W.  S.  Chase.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

BRITISH  NOVELISTS  AND  THEIR  STYLES.  By  David  Masson, 
M.  A.,  Author  of  Life  of  Milton.    16mo,  cloth.    75  cents. 

REPUBLICAN  CHRISTIANITY;  or,  True  Liberty,  exhibited  in  the  Life, 
Precepts,  and  early  Disciples  of  the  Redeemer.  By  E.  L.  Magoon.  12mo, 
cloth.    $1.25. 

THE  IIALLIG;  or,  the  Sheepfold  in  the  "Waters.  Translated  from  the  Ger- 
man of  Biernatski,  by  Mrs.  George  P.  Marsh.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

MANSEES   MISCELLANIES;   including  "  Prolegomina  Logica,"  "Mefa- 

physics,"  "  Limits  of  Demonstrative  Evidence,"  "Philosophy  of  Kant,"  etc 

12mo.     In  press. 

UO) 


(Baultr  una  fwtolit's  ^uWrtultons. 

(SCIENTIFIC.) 


ANNUAL  OF  SCIENTIFIC  DISCOVERY.  11  vols.,  from  1850-1860. 
By  D.  A.  Wells,  A.  M.  With  Portraits  of  distinguished  men.  12mo.  $1.25 
each. 

THE  PLURALITY  OF  WORLDS;  a  new  edition,  with  the  author's  re- 
views of  his  reviewers.    12mo.    $1.00. 

COMPARATIVE  ANATOMY  OF  THE  ANIMAL  KINGDOM.  By 
Trofs.  Siebold  and  Stannius.  Translated  by  W.  I.  Burnett,  M.  D.  8vo. 
S3.00 

HUGH  MILLERS  WORKS.  Testimony  of  the  Rocks.  With  Illus- 
trations.   12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 

. Footprints  of  tiie  Creator.  With  Il- 
lustrations.   Memoir  by  Louis  Agassiz.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

^_ The  Old  Red  Sandstone.    With  Illus- 


trations, etc.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 
My  Schools  and   Schoolmasters.    An 


Autobiography.    Full-length  Portrait  of  Author.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.25. 
. First  Impressions  of  England  and  its 


PEOPLE.     With  fine  Portrait.    12mo,  cloth.    $100. 


Cruise  of  the  Betsey.    A  Ramble  among 


the  Fossiliferous  Deposits  of  the  Hebrides.    12mo,  cloth.    $125. 

— Popular  Geology.    i2mo,  cloth.  $1.25. 


IIUGII  MILLER'S  WORKS,  7  vols.,  embossed  cloth,  with  box,  $8.25. 

UNITED  STATES  EXPLORING  EXPEDITION,  under  Charles 
Wilkes.  Vol.  XII.,  Mollusca  and  Shells.  By  A.  A.  Gould,  31.  D.  4to. 
$10  00. 

LAKE  SUPERIOR.  Its  Physical  Character,  Vegetation,  and  Animals.  By 
L.  Agassiz.    8vo.    $3.50. 

TIIE  NATURAL  HISTORY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SPECIES.  By  C 
Hamilton  Smith.  With  Elegant  Illustrations.  With  Introduction,  con- 
taining an  abstract  of  the  views  of  eminent  writers  on  the  subject,  by  S. 
Kneeland,  M.  D.    12mo.    $1.25. 

THE  CAMEL.  His  organization,  habits,  and  uses,  with  reference  to  his  intro- 
duction into  the  United  States.    ByGEORGEP.MAr.su.    12mo.    03  cents. 

INFLUENCE  OF  TIIE  HISTORY  OF  SCIENCE  UPON  INTEL- 
LECTUAL EDUCATION.    By  W.  Wiiewell,  D.  D.    12mo.    25  cents. 

SPIRITUALISM  TESTED;  ><v,  the  Facta  of  its  History  Classified,  and  tiieir 
causes  in  Nature  verified  from  Ancient  and  Modern  Testimonies.    By  Gho. 

.  \tsnN-,  I).  1j.     16mo,  cloth.    38  cents. 

151) 


<§0ttlfr  mxb  Jptimrln's  ^xxMxmtxann. 

(SABBATH    SCHOOL.) 


POPULAR  CYCLOPEDIA  OF  BIBLICAL  LITERATURE.  Con- 
densed, by  John  Kitto,  D.  D.    Numerous  Illustrations.    8vo.    $3.00. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  PALESTINE;  with  Chapters  on  its  Geography  and 
Natural  History,  its  Customs  and  Institutions.  By  John  Kitto,  D.  D. 
With  Illustrations.    12mo.     $1.25. 

ANALYTICAL  CONCORDANCE  TO  THE  HOLY  SCRIPTURES; 
or,  The  Bible  under  Distinct  and  Classified  Topics.  By  John  Eadie,  D.  D. 
8vo.    $3.00. 

CRUDEN'S  CONDENSED  CONCORDANCE.  By  Alex.  Ckuden.  8vo. 
Half  boards,  $1.25.    Sheep,  $1.50. 

COMMENTARY  ON  THE  ORIGINAL  TEXT  OF  THE  ACTS  OF 
THE  APOSTLES.    By  H.  B.  Hackett,  D.  D.    8vo.    $2.25. 

ILLUSTRATIONS  OF  SCRIPTURE.  Suggested  by  a  tour  through  the 
Holy  Land.  With  Illustrations.  New,  Enlarged  Edition.  By  H.  B. 
Hackett,  D.  D.    12mo,  cloth.    $1.00. 

PROF.  H.  J.  RIPLEY'S  NOTES. 

■ ON  THE  GOSPELS.      For  Teachers  in 

Sabbath  Schools,  and  as  an  Aid  to  Family  Instruction.  With  Map  of  Ca- 
naan.   Cloth,  embossed.    $1.25. 

On  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

With  Map  of  the  Travels  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  12mo,  cloth,  embossed.  75 
cents. 


On  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the 


ROMANS.     12mo,  cloth,  embossed.    67  cents. 

COMMENTARY  ON  THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  EPHESIANS.  Ex- 
planatory, Doctrinal,  and  Practical.  By  K.  E.  Pattison,  D.  D.  12mo.  85 
cents. 

MALCOM'S  NEW  BIBLE  DICTIONARY  of Barnes,  Objects,  and  Terms, 
found  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  By  Howard  Malcom,  D.  D.  16mo,  cloth. 
60  cents. 

HARMONY  QUESTIONS  ON  THE  FOUR  GOSPELS,  for  the  use  of 
Sabbath  Schools.  By  Rev.  S.  B.  Swaim,  D.  D.  Vol.  I.  ISmo,  cloth  backs. 
13  cents. 

SABBATH-SCHOOL  CLASS-BOOK.     By  E.  Lincoln.    13  cents. 

LINCOLN'S  SCRIPTURE  QUESTIONS;  with  Answers.    Scents. 

THE  SABBATH-SCHOOL  HARMONY;  with  appropriate  Hymns  and 
Music  for  Sabbath  Schools.    By  N.  D.  Gould.    13  cents. 

EVIDENCES  OF  CHRISTIANITY,  as  exhibited  in  the  writings  of  its  apol- 
ogists, down  to  Augustine.  By  Prof.  W.  J.  Bolton,  Cambridge,  England. 
12mo,  cloth.    80  cents. 

(«©) 


